Alphadawg7
-
Posts
24,627 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Alphadawg7
-
-
In order to be placed on the practice squad, you have to be released and clear waivers. Nobody claimed him.
While on the practice squad, you can be signed by any team. No team signed him for ten weeks until the Bills did.
So, it's a lot more than MacCarthy passing on him. Every team in the NFL in essence said they didn't want him on their roster.
Over exaggeration of the situation...Brohm was put on practice squad at a time where teams were completely set at QB with the season about to start. Its not very common for teams to add a QB at the point barring an injury because the QB essentially will be so far behind, especially one thats never played, that he would take a spot from someone else that could contribute.
Not to mention, being he had a poor showing in what very few pre season reps he had and that GB put him on the practice squad leads others to make assumptions too. I 100% guarantee that if Brohm was released in the offseason he would have been signed.
Way too much is made of the fact no one claimed him at that point without the consideration of the entire situation.
-
McMahon - Didn't even have an oline. Just Ditka
Doug Williams - a couple of scrubs they picked up at the bingo hall blocking for him. The Hogs? sound like scrubs to me.
Jeff Hostetler - playing behind a wall of swiss cheese. Parcells knows dick about protection
Mark Rypien - cool under pressure. Always had someone breathing down his neck. Made up for the sorry hogs.
Trent Dilfer - No line at all. Had someone on him before he even took the snap.
Brad Johnson - Ditto Trent Dilfer
Eli Manning - Never had a chance.
All these guys had teams w/ strong running games but no one blocking for the running backs.
And NE losing b/c the D got to Brady has less than nothing to do with pass protection.
And let's not forget those Dallas teams that beat Buffalo in the SB. Their line looked like a bunch of JV high school rejects. Aikman and Emmit didn't need any f*cking linemen.
It's all about the QB.
LOL, your post here doesnt even make sense...I love how you want to ignore what what is literally regarded as 3 of the best Defenses of all time (Chi, Balt, and NY), the other defenses were all amongst the best of their day as well, the HOF and Pro Bowl RB's, HOF and Pro Bowl WR's, HOF and Pro Bowl TE's, including the #1 RB of all time and the #1 TE of all time, as well as the high level coaching present on these teams which has not even been mentioned yet and just decided that the O Lines are why those teams won. I guarantee you, without a shadow of a doubt, that at the bare min 5 of those 7 SB winners dont even make it to the SB that year let alone win it without the defenses they had. The other 2 would have been questionable too.
More importantly, its obviously clear you either werent old enough to even watch these teams or didnt watch football back then because if you did you would know that the "Hogs" had nothing to do with the Redskin teams of those SB years and were founded in 1982 when Theisman was the QB...lmao, so you are making assumptions about OL's on teams rather than making factual comments...
-
obviously there is no perfect answer to building a super bowl winner....and there are always examples or exceptions to make in support of or against any strategy.
- in the early 90's the bills had pro bowlers at BOTH , QB (Kelly) and across the O-line (Wolford, Richter,Hull,Davis & Ballard) and STILL lost 4 times in the Super Bowl.....but they were an explosive high scoring machine...because the O-line provided outstanding protection and Kelly had ALOT of time to look all over the field.
- "IF" Kelly & Thurman played behind last years (or any recent years) offensive line for their entire careers...NEITHER would be in the HOF.
- my earlier point about how Fitz looked in the last INDY game was simply about the difference "protection" means. .... the difference between giving the QB over 5 seconds to throw (1990 bills) versus under 3 seconds (2009 bills) is enormous. in that Indy game everything about the bills stayed exactly the same (all the players).....but because INDY rested their starters, the bills were able to provide better protection allowing Fitz and the team to look great.
- Jim McMahon, Doug Williams, Jeff Hostetler, Mark Rypien, Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson and Eli Manning were all mediocre QB's with great O-lines that won Super Bowls.
Lots of problems with this post for me...
1. The O Line of the Bills in the 90's was a bit overrated by you and made to look better because of the hurry up no huddle offense often employed and Kelly's ablity to get rid of the ball quickly. It was a good O Line, but lets not be so exaggerative to imply that it is what made Kelly and Thomas HOF players...I mean come on.
2. That brings me to your next point...no offense, but saying Kelly and Thomas would not be HOF players if they were on this team is about as dumb as anything I have seen on here recently. Aaron Rodgers had a pretty fantastic season and so did Ryan Grant playing behind an equally incompetent line...so, I guess you must think Rodgers is already significantly better than Kelly and Ryan Grant is better than Thurman if you think neither Kelly or Thurman could put really good numbers still on this team.
I mean the sheer ignorance of that statement is what frustrates me with this board so often. Kelly throwing to Evans and TO last year with Thurman recieving out of the backfield (even behind this O Line) would have equalled at least, the very least, 5 more wins and probably 6.
Now, if you put that same O Line from the 90's on this team with Trent and Fitz at QB, we might have won a game or two more, thats it, if even that. And thats not rocket science, all you have to do is look at what the QB's did when they had time which was literally nothing. You point out a game where Fitz looked good against SECOND stringers...you use the time he had as why he looked better and ignore the fact that he was playing against second and third stringers (on a disinterested team still frustrated they mailed it in when closing in on a perfect season).
3. The SB winning QB's you listed did NOT win those SB's because of their O Line...they won those SB's because they had the top ranked (or close to it) defenses in the league those years. Not saying the O Line didnt help, but to imply that the O Line is what got them over the hump is quite a stretch. Not to mention, almost all those teams had a load of talented offensive weapons, including some of the best to ever play their respective positions. Those teams were loaded from top to bottom, so to play up the O Line as if it was the reason those teams were able to win is a bit silly.
McMahon - Best D of all time, best RB of all time
Doug Williams - One of the best D's of its era, loaded at WR including an all time great in Monk, dominant RB's
Jeff Hostetler - One of the best D's of all time, dominant running game, should have lost anyway (thanks Norwood)
Mark Rypien - One of the most dominant offenses in the 90's loaded with weapons at WR and RB, dominant D
Trent Dilfer - One of the 2 best D's of all time, best TE in history, 2000 yard bruising RB
Brad Johnson - Pretty good QB on his own, good weapons on offense, one of the best D's of that time
Eli Manning - One of the best D's in the league, only team to get to Brady is why they won...in fact, the drive that won them the game the O line failed miserably, Eli made a miracle escape, throw, then catch or game was over.
So, lets be a little more realistic before we start annoiting these SB's to the O Lines of those teams...
-
You do realize Kitna is amongst the all time leaders in passing yards right? (That statement is in no way an endorsement of Kitna, just a direct response to you asking what has he ever done)
Is he a HOF caliber QB...of course not. Is he even a Pro Bowl type QB...NOPE...But the guy has put together some productive seasons in his career. He is in no way the long term answer, but I would rather see him behind center than suffer through another painful and literally embarassing year of watching Trent.
That being said, I still think Brohm has the most upside and could win this starting job anyway, so I dont really care if we have Trent or Kitna as either of them I think become the backup anyway.
PS: One more thing...the saddest part of this debate is that as old as Kitna is, as inconsistent, etc...we still would have won probably 3 or 4 more games last year with him over Trent and Fitz...Thats not a statement of Kitna being good, thats a statement about how bad our QB's were last year...
-
What has Kitna EVER done?.....not saying Edwards has done anything either...but this trade reminds me of trading garbage with your neighbor...and at least Edwards may have some upside with Gailly's tutoring. The previous regime destroyed everything in its path.
You do realize Kitna is amongst the all time leaders in passing yards right? (That statement is in no way an endorsement of Kitna, just a direct response to you asking what has he ever done)
Is he a HOF caliber QB...of course not. Is he even a Pro Bowl type QB...NOPE...But the guy has put together some productive seasons in his career. He is in no way the long term answer, but I would rather see him behind center than suffer through another painful and literally embarassing year of watching Trent.
That being said, I still think Brohm has the most upside and could win this starting job anyway, so I dont really care if we have Trent or Kitna as either of them I think become the backup anyway.
-
I can count 4 EASY maybe 6
09/14 @ New England Patriots L 24 - 25
09/27 NEW ORLEANS SAINTS L 7 - 27
10/11 CLEVELAND BROWNS L 3 - 6
11/22 @ Jacksonville Jaguars L 18 - 15
12/03 NEW YORK JETS (Toronto) L 13 - 19
12/20 NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS L 10 - 17
If we had a pro bowl talented QB at the helm we win no less than 4 of those games. Guess what? That is 10-12 wins and maybe the division title.
I cant believe it, but I actually totally agree with this post by you...lol...whats this world coming too...
-
let's just say for the sake of arguement we replaced Trent Edwards with a pro bowl level QB ( like Rivers, Rodgers, Romo or McNabb) ......not an ALL PRO level like (Manning, Brees or Brady)......how many more wins would we have had from last years team if that was the only difference and everything else stayed exactly the same (players, injuries, etc...) ??
do the exact same thing at Left Tackle,.....plug in a pro bowl level LT (like Roos, Diehl, Long or Gross)....not ALL PRO like Clady or Thomas).
i know we need BOTH a QB & LT but i would rather have a below average QB with an Pro Bowl LT than a pro Bowl QB with a below average LT. the left tackle helps in both facets of the offense....RUNNING and passing.
in another thread someone made a point about how good Fitzpatrick and the bills looked against INDY at the end of the season when he had plenty of protection against indy's second string.
This isnt even a worthy debate...lets be honest here. With a better QB, we EASILY win at least 5 more games. LT upgrade wouldnt have nearly the same impact. If you could say that our QB's played well when given time and took advantage of that, then you might have some validity with the LT. However, our QB's were not good even when given time. Even in week 1 Trents lack of production in the second half and inability to throw to a WR in that game kept the game close enough that NE was able to steal it. With McNabb in there pushing the ball downfield the whole game, using our WR's, and further opening up the running game we would have had a bigger lead and won that game.
So, its no secret our OL struggled, especially with injuries to key players like Wood and Butler, but a Pro Bowl LT would not have gotten us to the playoffs last year.
You want further proof, the year before we HAD a Pro Bowl LT with the same sorry starting QB going into the season and a terrible backup...guess what, still a losing record and still atrocious play by our QB's even though our line was better and had a Pro Bowl LT.
-
I don`t think our o-line is as bad coming back this tear as one thinks.Look at Rodgers from Green Bay he gets wacked and sacked all the time. BUt still puts up big numbers. Big Ben in Pitt same thing.Manning in Indy quick release and smart makes his line look great. I saw Trent and Fitz have a decent amount of times passing this year. I mostly blame our O-stuggles on game planning and game time adjustments and poor QB play.
QB was by far the worst position on this team last year...case in point, even when the QB had time to throw our QB's failed captialized, especially Trent who played mostly in the early part of the year when the O Line wasnt as bad because we had not yet lost Wood or Butler to injury.
The O Line was not good by any means, but the QB play was atrocious even when the Line held up.
That being said, I am optimistic about both the O Line and QB position this year. Wood and Levitre will be better and I think Wood will be back in time and fully recovered. Butler reitiring hurts, by I think Meredith could be a solid player. LT is clearly the biggerst question mark and I hope to address that in the draft.
At QB I really think Brohm can and will win the starting job and I think he has a lot of potential. Not sure if he will be the starter week 1, but I do think he has the most talent of the QB's on this roster.
We will see how it plays out, but with the O Line likely better this year and the potential of Brohm, I think we should see nice improvements in both areas.
-
It's not just one thing with Maybin, it's a collection of things with him that irks the fans sentiment toward them. If Maybin showed some promise last season no one would care what he's doing, the problem is he looked like a boy playing with men last year. Factor in that in his most recent pictures he looks like a bulked up WR, Bills fan are generally worried that this guy is quickly becoming a bust.
I didn't like Maybin coming into the draft last year, and I still don't. Dude has the swagger and attitude f an All-Pro and the only thing he's done so far in his 1 year is embarrass himself.
Bust or no bust, him being around McGahee has exactly ZERO relevance to his development and this upcoming season. Its the offseason and he can do what ever he wants with who ever he wants as long as its not illegal (see Marshawn) or detrimental to the team.
I mean seriously, following a player to the point of knowing who he is with and caring about it is border line obsessive.
Post something when it actually has something to do with his development or play...
-
If we might need some veteran experience & someone to help as far as teaching our young QB contingent, that could be a viable starter as well as a good back up with a winning history in his career . I have often wondered what some Bills fans might think about signing a Jeff Garcia ???
He was a winner in the CFL & has been a winner in the NFL . He has adaptability , has played in the elements , & as far as i know wouldn't command a huge contract & would probably be a good leader in the locker room . So what do you think ??Whats the benefit of bringing in Garcia? At his age, he wont play more than a year or so, so unless you think this team is a SB contender with him and not one without him (ala Vikings and Favre) then bringing in someone like him makes no sense what so ever. All it does is slow down the development of our young guys like Brohm and maybe a rookie if we also draft a guy.
Honestly, we are not going to make a serious leap forward in 2010 unless we bring in someone like McNabb...so if the QB isnt on that level, then I say lets see what Brohm can do so we know if we need to draft a QB next year or not. Brohm has as much upside as any guy coming out this year at this point, plus he has 2 years to better adjust to the NFL and some time in Buffalo already to build some rapport with the rest of the offense and staff.
So let Brohm battle for the #1 spot, if he cant claim it over the course of this season or atleast show he is progressing to it, then we go into next years draft with QB the #1 priority. Then we can use this draft, which is deep in our other position of needs like in the trenches to fill our other holes.
-
With todays signings I think it makes McClain and Dan Williams less likely at #9. Although, I never really thought Dan Williams was likely to be picked at 9 anyway, especially with similar NT prospects to likely be had in the 2nd.
McClain though is still potential choice, less likely than before, but I think he is graded high enough that they could still take him if he is there and no one else they like better is.
I actually am really starting to think we will take Spiller and then move Lynch for more picks in this draft once we do. Okung, Bulaga, and Trent will all likely be gone by the time we pick, and maybe even Campbell. Even if Campbell is there, he is too much of a project and I think they would pull the trigger on the best offensive playmaker in the draft with Spiller over him easily.
100% for sure 2 of the OT's will be chosen. Plus Suh, McCoy and Bradford are certainly gone. So theres 5 of the top 8...the question is who will the other 3 players be that will be taken ahead of us? The most likely candidates are Berry, Trent, Claussen, Spiller, Campbell, Haden, Juan Pierre, and maybe even Taylor Mays to Oak as Al Davis might pull the trigger and take him.
If Trent Williams is there I would think we definitely take him. I just dont think he will be there. I think he goes in the top 8. Thats 6 down...I also think Berry is too good to fall out of the top 8...so theres 7. I also think the Skins will take Claussen...theres the top 8.
That leaves us with a likely selection of one of these 4 players...Spiller, Campbell, McClain, Dan Williams. Of those 4, Spiller and McClain are clearly the better players, but Spiller to me would have the bigger impact because our offense is clearly our weakest unit. He is more dynamic than Lynch, and our D was already solid before we added Davis and Edwards today. So with our injured players back, the emergence of Byrd, the prospects of Maybin, and the signings today our foucs will most likely be offense at #9 and Spiller is the best offensive prospect in this draft.
Plus Chan is very familiar with how talented Spiller is, so I think our pick will be Spiller unless somehow Bulaga slips or Trent Williams is there (both of which I think will not be).
-
If you want to argue that Spiller is a more dynamic back than Lynch I will give you that point. But Lynch is a tougher back who is also capable of being a big play player. If all the upper tier OTs are gone when our turn comes up then there are some high quality defensive players who would be available for us, such as NT Williams, DE Morgan etc.
My basic point is that it is time that the Bills stopped trading a position to replace that same position. It is not allowing us to move forward. Is Lynch immature? Without a doubt he is. But that doesn't make him a bad person or a person who can't behave in a more mature manner. Just because this is a new regime it doesn't mean that it is willing to let a relatively high first round player and talent go for a third or fourth round pick. I'm much more willing to give Lynch a fresh start, especially after the way things started for him with the suspension.
The way for the Bills to accelerate the development of the team is to keep talent and add to it.
I dont really disagree with much of what you are saying...my points are that if you take into consideration the entire picture, picking Spiller at #9 is more plausible than I think you give it credit for is all.
Gailey builds around the ground game.
Top 3 tackles are likely off the board at 9, and maybe even top 4.
Dan Williams would be a big stretch at 9 and is less likely with Edwards signing.
McClain becomes less likely with A. Davis signing (although he could still be taken at #9 IMO).
Spiller would be by far the best offensive player available (if he is even there)
On top of all that:
Lynch had a down year and actually lost his job to Freddie during the season.
This regime has no attachment to Lynch making trading him easier.
FO I think is tired of his off field issues.
This offense needs a spark and a change.
Spiller looks to be more explosive with better hands and would be seen as an upgrade over Lynch.
Lynch could still fetch us value with mid round picks via trade for this deep draft.
Chan has seen the talents of Spiller first hand.
The film doesnt lie...Lynch doesnt hit his holes well enough and dances at the line. Also drops too many balls.
So, while I think Lynch does deserve a fresh start and still has the potential to be a really good back in this league if he can stop dancing at the line so much, I still think given the situation come draft day that I wont be surprised if we go with Spiller and then trade Lynch for mid round picks.
My personal preference is to take an OT, but I just dont believe one will be there that will be a better pickup than Spiller. Taking Spiller and trading Lynch makes more sense to me than stretching for Dan Williams.
-
Oh come on now...am I the only one who has noticed that the OP garbo has not made one post in this thread? Seriously, this thread is on page 5 when it was clearly a bogus topic started by a bogus poster who conveniently nicknamed himself garbo which pretty much references garabage which is what this thread was intended to be.
Ashton Kutcher is that you because you all just got punked by "garbo"...funny thing is this thread will probably reach 10 pages before it dies...
-
The interest in Spiller doesn't make much sense. What good would it do to get a dynamic back when the OL is dysfunctional? If the Bills had an effective line then it would make sense, just as it made sense for the Vikings to draft AP a few years back because they already had a very powerful OL.
A lot of people are critical of Lynch because of his behavior and so far lack of production, especially last year. But he is a talent who needs to be coached up. He was the second rated back a couple of years ago, only behind AP. Let's not get into that repetitive destructive cycle of getting rid of a talent only to replace that same talent. The Bills desperately need to ADD talent, not merely fill in the hole AGAIN by the departure of talent.
I agree with a lof of what you said, but if you look closer at the situation I think its more likely and makes more sense than you think.
If one of the top LT's are there, I do think we certainly grab one and 100% should. But reality sets in and we look at the top 8 and realize its very very likely that the top 3 OT will be gone. 100% for sure, 2 of them will be gone IMO, and likely 3 and possibly even 4 will be taken in top 8. I think it will be 3 personally Okung, Bulaga, and Trent. Raiders may take Campbell too as Al Davis loves his workout wonders...
So wheres that leave us at #9? McClain, Dan Williams, or Campbell (if he is there) versus taking Spiller. Well, considering we just signed Davis and Edwards today, that will lessen the chance of taking McClain or reaching for Williams. So, if Spiller is there, he is easily the best offensive player in this draft and offense was a big sore spot for us. Add in Chan's familiarity with Spiller, Lynch's tendency to dance at the line and drop passes (not to mention his off field stuff), and the fact this staff has no attachment to Lynch, then that makes Spiller even more plausible.
Not to mention, this draft is deep with players in the trenches and LB's but it lacks in big time offensive playmakers. So taking Spiller at 9, then moving Lynch for a mid round pick in a deep draft for our other areas of need makes sense to me if no tackles are there and none of the other Elite prospects have slipped.
-
From the way things are going I think the Bills trade down and get an additional 2nd round pick. I can see the following happening next...
Round 1 Trent Williams LT OU
Round 2 Cody NT Bamma
Round 2 McCoy QB Texas.
All they did was consistantly perform at a high level in College and that is what Nix is looking for. I know some will hate it, but if the draft went down like that along with picking up some LB, DE, WR help in rounds 3-7 I would be pretty happy.
Here are the very apparent problems with your scenario here...
1. The only way we will find a trading partner to trade down is if either Claussen or Berry slip to us at #9. Neither is very likely, with the Berry scenario the least likely. There will be no one available at #9 to inspire teams to trade up for. The only players teams will see worth trading up for to get at #9 are Suh, McCoy, Bradford, Okung, Berry and Claussen. All are almost certainly gone by 9 except Claussen and Berry who are also likely to be gone but could slip depending if there is a big run on OT's like some think. Bulaga could also inspire trade partners, but no way we trade down if Bulaga by some miracle is there at #9.
2. If we somehow do trade down, Trent Williams most likely will not be there to take later unless we stay close to the 9 spot. Many think he will be gone even before #9. But then, that brings up the problem in #1 again. Who will be there at #9 to make a team give up their second round pick to move up a couple of spots? No one unless its Claussen or Berry.
3. Cody will not be there when we draft in the 2nd. His conditioning will make him slip in terms of where his production should have him drafted, but the better teams in the NFL drafting in the bottom of the first round who can afford to take a chance on this kid based on his film later will likely snatch him up. If not, then surely some team at the top of 2nd round.
4. Dont under estimate the Bills interest in Spiller either at #9. The new staff wants to ramp up the offense and are known for their ground game. I honestly get the feeling the new staff isnt as big of a Lynch fan as some posters on this board. His off the field problems, lack of explosiveness because of his tendency to dance at the line and also frequent dropped passes have made him expendable and even a liability in some aspects.
IMO, at #9, to me the most likely scenario is we will take an OT unless the ones we want are already gone, in which case we will take either Spiller, McClain or Dan Williams.
-
This is great news IMO...he is a very underrated LB and is a great addition to a weak spot on this team.
-
Actually, the entire secondary is overrated. Remember the opening game vs the Pats, Moss and Welker had like 25 catches between them? Yeah, great lockdown coverage. We don't have a single DB that WR's are losing sleep over facing. Don't overreact though and try and say I'm advocating taking a CB in the draft, cause I'm not. Just saying our secondary isn't that great, middle of the pack is about right.
News flash...Byrd didnt play in that game
-
LMAO at this thread and the fact its still going on...its crystal clear the OP just wanted to stir crap up, hence the reason he isnt even posting in this thread and probably sitting back getting his rocks off watching everyone wig out.
Only a complete idiot would make this claim (which there are some on this board), but they would at least be in the thread arguing with total jackass statements, made up stats, rediculous claims and continuous gibberish (see: southgeorgiabillsfan, billsfan=pain, etc.).
This person clearly isnt and wrote this thread to stif the pot because he's never been kissed and needs to do something to float his boat...
-
Lets offer Philly that we swap our frist rounders for McNabb
We then draft Charles Brown, OT, USC with Philly's 24th pick
Then use our second to draft Terrence Cody, NT, Alabama
then our third on Sean Lee, ILB, Penn State or Tyson Alualu, DT, California
Just a pipe dream
Considering Philly has been reported to be looking for a first round pick and some change, why on earth would you think they would trade him for us by just swapping picks? If this could be done, it would have already happened.
If we swap first roud picks with them, it would take at least our 2nd rounder this year and probably our 2nd rounder next year or at the very least would include this years 2nd and a 3rd this year or next.
-
He's a seasoned veteran, hard worker, and he's still productive. On top of that, he could teach some of our young guys how to play this game. Seems like someone this team needs.
His career speaks for itself: http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/4654/c...qxjUpOYA93.uLYF
He is a great, and a great techer...excpet he will hold our young guys back. Say what you want about TO, but our guys got work with one of the hardest working players in football last year...its time for them to spread their wings already. Hardy and Johnson are still big unknowns, if you bring in Holt as a #2, then that pushes them back off the field a lot. Even if Holt is #3, he is still keeping one of the two off the field.
We already have a talented WR in Evans, its time to develop the talent behind him so we know what we have. Considering no one is expecting too much out of this team next year, this is the year to do it.
-
I stand corrected. Although it makes the Bungles look even dumber. If people think TO brings distractions/problems and is in decline...
Yeah, seemed like a no brainer to me for them to sign him. Although, Bryant was a decent signing too, but TO I think compliments Ocho more and you already know Ocho can share the ball as he did with TJ. I bet TO was licking his chops to play for that offense compared to ours too, so he would have been on his best behavior...
-
The only logical explanation in choosing Antonio Bryant (you want to talk irrelevant on the field) over TO is that TO turned down Cincy's offer. It's actually fairly obvious.
Actually, this is not true at all. Its already been reported by Schefter and others that Cincy never offered TO a contract of any kind. He left Cincy with no offer and then they went out and signed Bryant.
They chose Bryant over TO. Could be they new TO was going to expect a higher offer that they were not prepared to give him, but either way, they elected to pass on offering TO a contract and instead make an offer to Bryant which he accepted.
-
I seriously doubt Cincy signs TO now that they have signed Bryant, so with Balt trading for Boldin too that leaves really no known possible destinations for him. The only 2 teams that pubicly have shown any interest (although Balt's interest was very low any way) have gone out and paid good money for other WR's...
Could he find himself without a job this year?
Would the Bills bring him back for cheap if he had no other takers?
Would NE bring him in for cheap if he had no other options?
-
Bulaga? when was the last time the bills took they guy they were supposed to? i think theyll end up taking someone like weatherspoon and have everyone scratching their heads.
Doesnt matter, he wont be there at #9...
Why are we down on Brohm?
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
You act like those Pro Personnel Dept people from the other teams were sitting in on GB's practices watching the kid play. No one has any film on him except the very limited preseason time he played which wasnt very impressive. So, it isnt like these teams were able to build their own evaluation on him like GB did. In fact, the ONLY team with any info on him was GB and despite having a top QB in Rodgers who is young and a back up they love, they still tried to keep him.
The reality of the situation was that the other teams had their active rosters set, had multiple QB's already, had PS QB's already, all that could contribute during the upcoming season. Brohm, with ZERO playing time ever in the NFL, and no time on the team to learn their playbook would have taken a roster spot from someone who could contribute yet wouldnt have been able to contribute himself. So, to do that, they had to look at his preseason outings, where he struggled, to decide if they should take a roster spot from someone to pick him up.
So, like you, they had obvious assumptions about him because GB did stash him on the PS. FYI: The entire NFL passed on Brady at least 6 times each...Bill Walsh thought Jim Drunkenmiller was going to be a stud and said JJ Stokes was going to be the next Jerry Rice and traded up to get him...how did those work out? Those are just a few of endless examples where teams for whatever reason believed in a guy or didnt believe in a guy just to find out the opposite was true.