Greybeard Posted November 20, 2004 Posted November 20, 2004 dude YOU could have those stats if bledsoe was locking onto you and tossing 15+ attempts at you every week. 126030[/snapback] Actually I think your making an argument for the opposition here. If you know DB locks on to Moulds and is going to throw to him that many times, what do you do? You cover his A$$ with whatever it takes. And that is exactly what teams do. So for Moulds to get free and get that many catches makes him pretty good. BTW, the last time you were pulling the plug on a receiver that wasn't any good, the passing game totally fell apart. You then preached we needed another receiver to take some of the pressure off Moulds. You can't have it both ways.
ICE Posted November 20, 2004 Posted November 20, 2004 Actually I think your making an argument for the opposition here. If you know DB locks on to Moulds and is going to throw to him that many times, what do you do? You cover his A$$ with whatever it takes. And that is exactly what teams do. So for Moulds to get free and get that many catches makes him pretty good. BTW, the last time you were pulling the plug on a receiver that wasn't any good, the passing game totally fell apart. You then preached we needed another receiver to take some of the pressure off Moulds. You can't have it both ways. 126052[/snapback] Actually you are incorrect. I said 1) Price is NOT a #1 WR and doesn't deserve the money (I was right) 2) he didn't want to be here. (Again I was correct)
Greybeard Posted November 20, 2004 Posted November 20, 2004 Actually you are incorrect. I said 1) Price is NOT a #1 WR and doesn't deserve the money (I was right) 2) he didn't want to be here. (Again I was correct) 126055[/snapback] You are correct you said both of those things, many times actually. But you also stated we didn't need him, in the same manner you are now talking about Moulds. If he would have stayed, the Bills would have been better. Yes, I know he should not have been kept for more than he was worth but at a fair price, he was still an asset. As it turns out there was a chemistry in the passing game which was lost when he left.
Guest Guest_eyedog_* Posted November 20, 2004 Posted November 20, 2004 I would trade Moulds in the offseason for a mid 1st round pick.
Rico Posted November 20, 2004 Posted November 20, 2004 WAIK UP YOU FRICKEN IDIOTS 125744[/snapback] It's friggin, not fricken.
Thailog80 Posted November 20, 2004 Posted November 20, 2004 It's friggin, not fricken. 126073[/snapback] Obviously he wasn't fully awaik.
ICE Posted November 20, 2004 Posted November 20, 2004 You are correct you said both of those things, many times actually. But you also stated we didn't need him, in the same manner you are now talking about Moulds. If he would have stayed, the Bills would have been better. Yes, I know he should not have been kept for more than he was worth but at a fair price, he was still an asset. As it turns out there was a chemistry in the passing game which was lost when he left. 126065[/snapback] The loss of price was not a problem. BLEDSOE has been the problem since about week 9 of the 2002 season.
Guest BADOL Posted November 20, 2004 Posted November 20, 2004 Seriously. I love ya guys. BUT THIS IS ERIC MOULDS. Eric Moulds is our boy. Original Buffalo Bill. Bleeds red, and blue. Not some guy to just get traded. I can not BELIEVE some of you wanna-be Bills fans want to get rid of Eric. He is Buffalo. Think about 2 players, people think of when they hear Buffalo. Drew Bledsoe (for bad) and Eric Moulds (for good). He has given us 3 pro bowls. He is having ANOTHER pro-bowl season ... is on pace for 90+ receptions and 7+ TD's ... Moulds to the DEATH ... ... and i hope he is BURIED in a BILLS UNIFORM. 125744[/snapback] "Eric Moulds is a better receiver than that" "There's your first round pick, and he drops a pass put right in his hands when you are trying to get back in the game" "The Patriots receivers never drop a pass" "Bills receivers just seem to lose their concentration" Anyone remember this telling commentary near the end of last weeks debacle? It's paraphrased, but the point is losing is contagious. Eric Moulds sets the tone for this teams receiving corps, and he is a loser. Always been a heartless loser as a Bill. It's OK for Moulds to unnecessarily jump and drift out of bounds causing an incompletion late in a game when the Bills are multiple scores from tying because that's Moulds. He's hit and miss. Some like to blame Bledsoe for being inaccurate, but he's been dropping easy ones since Kelly, Collins, Johnson and Flutie. The Patriots receivers don't come close to matching Moulds physically, but they are brutally efficient. It's no surprise that they seem interchangeable, because just to get on the field they have to play at a very high level physically and mentally. Moulds is a great talent, but a bad example. Does the reputadly surehanded Evans catch that pass from Bledsoe if he knows that he may get benched if he doesn't? The Patriot model says yes. I've long admired Moulds talent, but the reality is that he IS a loser, he IS a part of the problem, and his departure might just make this a better team next year. I believe the departure of Ruben Brown has helped the offensive line at least get on a path TOWARD success, hopefully Moulds departure will change the trajectory of the young receivers on this team. I hate to harp on the Pats, but their presence in the division should raise the bar for this team, instead they seem confined by the presence of leaders like Moulds who have been career underachievers.
cåblelady Posted November 20, 2004 Posted November 20, 2004 Oh kiss my ass. 126028[/snapback] xxx xxx
Nanker Posted November 20, 2004 Posted November 20, 2004 It's friggin, not fricken. 126073[/snapback] I'm pretty sure he didn't mean IDIOTS, he meant MAROONS.
Recommended Posts