Bills Tender Keith Freaking Ellison

[dgrid]

Wilson just got tendered, 2nd rnd like purple Haze said.

Now for Incognito, B Scott, Schouman...

[Biscuit97]

Since you're so smart, please name the 'dozens' of former Bills players currently enjoying success on other teams. There's Jim Leonard, who was well liked as nice player. You can also argue for Justin Bannan, who was a nice DT back-up, and was a nice rotational player for the Ravens. I don't recall anyone wanting to run these two out of town. Please name the other 'dozens' of players currently enjoying success.

 

Interesting you call people morons but can't spell "nickel" correctly. Ellison is a cover 2 weakside LB, and an average to below average one at that. He is not a fit in the 3-4. Anyone with a brain knows that. Perhaps you lack one. So "letting him go for nothing is idiotic?" Well if no one signs Ellison and the Bills end up cutting him later and getting nothing, you're saying the Bills are idiotic?

 

You're guilty of what you accuse others of being - a self-professed expert on personnel. You'll see that no other GM wants Ellison. I suppose they're all buffoons too. Keep drinking the kool-aid dude.

Leonhard, Bannan, Winfield, Fat Pat, Jabari, Willis, Aiken wow just goes to show how bad we draft. Soon to be Ellison,Whitner, Reed, Roscoe, and Lynch

[truth on hold]

He's a good player for his price. Not a pro-bowler, but a guy that can fill in a lot of spots ESPECIALLY important for this team with a lot of holes.

 

People need to realize that not everyone on every team's roster is a pro bowler

[Rzon604]

Leonhard, Bannan, Winfield, Fat Pat, Jabari, Willis, Aiken wow just goes to show how bad we draft. Soon to be Ellison,Whitner, Reed, Roscoe, and Lynch

 

 

Another idiotic response - go back to the original post. The guy called me an idiot and that there have been 'dozens' of current Bills that people like me WANTED RUN OUT OF TOWN (just like Ellison) and they went on to have success on other teams. I said Leonard and Bannan have had success, but THEY WERE NOT RUN OUT OF TOWN.

 

Fat Pat was not run out of town. EVERYONE wanted him re-signed

Winfield was not run out of town. EVERYONE wanted him re-signed

Jabari WAS NOT RUN OUT OF TOWN

Aiken was not run out of town, and I would hardly say he's been anything special

Willis was run out of town, but not because he couldn't play.

 

You are yet another person incapable of reading something and understanding. There sure seem to be a ton on this board. Every time I have been attacked the person has had bad facts, misrepresented what I said, or both.

[Thoner7]

Hallelujah! Someone on this board with a brain!

 

much appreciated Rzon. I will have to remember your name as far as a poster who actually knows something

 

Have you considered that they could be going down to the last minute with some of the guys you mentioned because they are still trying to work out a long term deal? Then they could use that tender on a different player. Say they sign Wilson. Now you can use the 2nd round tender on Incognito, lets say. But if no long term deal is in effect you give Wilson the 2nd round tender, which they did.

 

And listen, just because people seem to like Icongnito does not mean Nix likes him. And because Nix might not like him doesn't make him wrong. Maybe there's some reason behind the scenes that makes him someone the team doesn't want. Or maybe they feel they can do better. Or maybe he will be brought back. There's still time to do it. Everybody needs to calm down.

 

My understanding is that teams can tender a player AND work on a long term deal until a certain date, or maybe until the player signs the tender. Is that correct? How does it work? I would love to sign G. Wilson to a long term deal - but we have to tender him. Can we do both?

 

Wilson just got tendered, 2nd rnd like purple Haze said.

Now for Incognito, B Scott, Schouman...

 

Thank God. Any infor on my comments above about the long term deal?

[Steely Dan]

So all RFA tenders or deal need to be done today, right?

that'd include Wilson, Incognito, B Scott, Schouman. What they waiting on?

 

I'm not sure Incognito has the discipline Chansaw wants.

 

 

First off, Ellison is better than trend following TSW posters give him credit for. Most people on this board dont have a clue to how to view how he plays and just spout out about he sucks because its the en vogue thing to do. Is he a great LB...no, of course not. But, is he a LB that has value to this team...yes.

 

In case you missed it, we SORELY lack depth on this team, so how does it make sense to just get rid of everyone like this board seems to want to do? We lack even more depth at LB where ever year we have players who down with injury. Ellison had a decent year and is good player to have around until we have someone better in place to replace him. But we cant just cut 50% of the team and expect to upgrade every spot.

 

Letting Ellison walk makes no sense. I am sure we will sign someone in FA, draft a LB, or both to help our LB corp out. But until then, Ellison still has value to this team and isnt as bad as this board likes to make him out to be.

 

What he said.

 

 

This guy would be to small to play for the Sabres!

 

6'0" 229?

 

 

Have you considered that they could be going down to the last minute with some of the guys you mentioned because they are still trying to work out a long term deal? Then they could use that tender on a different player. Say they sign Wilson. Now you can use the 2nd round tender on Incognito, lets say. But if no long term deal is in effect you give Wilson the 2nd round tender, which they did.

 

And listen, just because people seem to like Icongnito does not mean Nix likes him. And because Nix might not like him doesn't make him wrong. Maybe there's some reason behind the scenes that makes him someone the team doesn't want. Or maybe they feel they can do better. Or maybe he will be brought back. There's still time to do it. Everybody needs to calm down.

 

There's a reason the Rams cut him.

[Thoner7]

There's a reason the Rams cut him.

 

Im not arguing you personally, but couldnt the Ellsion defense work for Incognito too?

 

IE: most fans say "No big deal with Ellison, we need the depth anyways" Well what about Incognito? Right now at G we have Levitre and...... well thats it. Wood is injured and if I were to guess will be moving to center once he is ready. So at best we have 1 1/2 guards on the entire roster (correct me if I am wrong but Simmons/McKinny are UFAs and Chambers is more or less a T, and not starting caliber by any means). We have more depth at LB than the OL. So if people are ok with Ellison being tendered, they should be clamoring for Incog to be tendered? Im not a big fan of his but our OL is in such shambles we need him desperately. That is unless we add 3 starting caliber OL this off season... which I dont see happening.

 

As far as 3-4 personnel goes, Im certain we could go out and sign some UDFA rook who could play at least as well as Ellison, and that rook would have way more upside than the 4 year vet Ellison. Im not too certain I could say the same with Incognito...

[Delete This Account]

The fact you said he is "highly regarded as a cover linebacker" shows you are as bright as a 5 watt light bulb. Good luck finding one other person anywhere to agree with you. He was only in the game at the end because Poz was hurt, so in the nickel package HE WASN'T EVEN SUPPOSED TO BE ON THE FIELD, so he was not one of the top 2 cover-guys, out of 3. Get a brain, doctor.

ok, mr. 18 posts. that's enough. this villifying other posters for providing their opinion is way over the line, buddy.

keith ellison is a good backup player, who was never meant to be a starter, but always wound up filling in adequately when the need arose.

you can write as much as you want in capital letters and make school-ground accusations in a bid to bully others, but it doesn't fly.

i like Keith Ellison, and i think it's a smart move by the bills to tender him. as others here have posted, to lose him for nothing would be foolish.

 

jw

[Steely Dan]

Im not arguing you personally, but couldnt the Ellsion defense work for Incognito too?

 

IE: most fans say "No big deal with Ellison, we need the depth anyways" Well what about Incognito? Right now at G we have Levitre and...... well thats it. Wood is injured and if I were to guess will be moving to center once he is ready. So at best we have 1 1/2 guards on the entire roster (correct me if I am wrong but Simmons/McKinny are UFAs and Chambers is more or less a T, and not starting caliber by any means). We have more depth at LB than the OL. So if people are ok with Ellison being tendered, they should be clamoring for Incog to be tendered? Im not a big fan of his but our OL is in such shambles we need him desperately. That is unless we add 3 starting caliber OL this off season... which I dont see happening.

 

As far as 3-4 personnel goes, Im certain we could go out and sign some UDFA rook who could play at least as well as Ellison, and that rook would have way more upside than the 4 year vet Ellison. Im not too certain I could say the same with Incognito...

 

I think the difference is attitude and on field discipline. IIRC, that's why the Rams cut Incognito. Chansaw demands discipline on the field and may feel Incognito can't ever have it or doesn't fit his image of team chemistry. JMO

[CountDorkula]

Gary Brackett is an inside linebacker. Ellison could not replace him, he is strictly a weakside LB. Can anyone make a coherent point here?

 

 

You might wana bring it down a notch broski, attacking the vets when you are new is not a good way to gain cred, unless you wana be catagorized...

 

 

 

which i see it is to late you already have been, well best of luck to you.

 

 

And coherent, no im to drunk to be coherent.

[Thoner7]

I think the difference is attitude and on field discipline. IIRC, that's why the Rams cut Incognito. Chansaw demands discipline on the field and may feel Incognito can't ever have it or doesn't fit his image of team chemistry. JMO

 

I agree with that 100% - thats why I dont like relying on him moving forward. I dont like Hang at C either, but I feel the Bills simply dont have the luxury of moving forward without those guys. We just dont have any good players, starting wise or depth wise. Thats why Ellison is being retained. I think letting Incognito walk would be foolish because we just dont have anyone better and will be limited in bringing in anyone as good as him.

 

My point is, if the Bills tendered Ellison because they dont have anyone else, shouldnt they tender Incog for the same reason? Like others have said... you can always cut him later.

[Adam]

http://www.wgr550.com/pages/6495905.php

 

What a joke. Nice first move of FA, tender a useless 220 pound LB who doesn't fit inside or outside in your scheme. Nice job. This pisses me off so much, I thought we were finally rid of this d.b.

If I am the GM, I couldn't care less what fans want either. If our previous front office ignored the sheep, we would still have a starting caliber tackle. Now we have more holes to fill and it will be quite some time before we are in the playoffs. Sorry, I know thye truth hurts, but you will accept it.

 

Move along now.

[dave mcbride]

Since you're so smart, please name the 'dozens' of former Bills players currently enjoying success on other teams. There's Jim Leonard, who was well liked as nice player. You can also argue for Justin Bannan, who was a nice DT back-up, and was a nice rotational player for the Ravens. I don't recall anyone wanting to run these two out of town. Please name the other 'dozens' of players currently enjoying success.

 

Interesting you call people morons but can't spell "nickel" correctly. Ellison is a cover 2 weakside LB, and an average to below average one at that. He is not a fit in the 3-4. Anyone with a brain knows that. Perhaps you lack one. So "letting him go for nothing is idiotic?" Well if no one signs Ellison and the Bills end up cutting him later and getting nothing, you're saying the Bills are idiotic?

 

You're guilty of what you accuse others of being - a self-professed expert on personnel. You'll see that no other GM wants Ellison. I suppose they're all buffoons too. Keep drinking the kool-aid dude.

I agree with you entirely. Teams that decide they need backups for depth in case of injury are drinking the kool-aid themselves. It's much smarter to draft another LB in the sixth round this year and make him the backup given that experience for backups is overrated.

[John from Riverside]

I agree with you entirely. Teams that decide they need backups for depth in case of injury are drinking the kool-aid themselves. It's much smarter to draft another LB in the sixth round this year and make him the backup given that experience for backups is overrated.

 

I almost didnt get it.....

[manbeast]

He's not a pro bowler but wouldn't it be nice to have a ST player who can contribute if called upon. The guy has 38 starts, had 68 tackles 40 solo in only 8 games last year he also had. That's on pace for over 100 tackles that's a damn good back and STs player. You think you are going to get that kind of production out of a fifth round player next year.

[Rzon604]

ok, mr. 18 posts. that's enough. this villifying other posters for providing their opinion is way over the line, buddy.

keith ellison is a good backup player, who was never meant to be a starter, but always wound up filling in adequately when the need arose.

you can write as much as you want in capital letters and make school-ground accusations in a bid to bully others, but it doesn't fly.

i like Keith Ellison, and i think it's a smart move by the bills to tender him. as others here have posted, to lose him for nothing would be foolish.

 

jw

 

If someone attacks me personally, or misrepresents what I say I will respond in kind. I'm not trying to bully anybody. If you read all my posts, I admitted maybe I was too harsh but when I heard Ellison was the first RFA tendered I don't see the logic behind that. And because I have 18 posts I somehow have less credibility or knowledge than someone with 3,000? Isn't that a person attack on me - telling me I'm an idiot or have no credibility because I haven't posted often? Sorry, but the poster you referenced attacked me first. He also stated argue Ellison is "highly coveted cover man"; that shows a lack of knowledge. I made the very sound point that Jauron saw him as a run-stuffer, not a cover man (as evidenced by the fact Ellison was not in the nickel package to start the season). You're entitled to your own opinion, not your own facts. I would think that a sports writer would be a little more able to read an statement, examine the facts, etc. Your guilty of doing the same thing you're accusing me of. And on top of that, you're wrong.

[John from Riverside]

If someone attacks me personally, or misrepresents what I say I will respond in kind. I'm not trying to bully anybody. If you read all my posts, I admitted maybe I was too harsh but when I heard Ellison was the first RFA tendered I don't see the logic behind that. And because I have 18 posts I somehow have less credibility or knowledge than someone with 3,000? Isn't that a person attack on me - telling me I'm an idiot or have no credibility because I haven't posted often? Sorry, but the poster you referenced attacked me first. He also stated argue Ellison is "highly coveted cover man"; that shows a lack of knowledge. I made the very sound point that Jauron saw him as a run-stuffer, not a cover man (as evidenced by the fact Ellison was not in the nickel package to start the season). You're entitled to your own opinion, not your own facts. I would think that a sports writer would be a little more able to read an statement, examine the facts, etc. Your guilty of doing the same thing you're accusing me of. And on top of that, you're wrong.

 

 

So who has the over/under when Rzon gets booted?

[Delete This Account]

If someone attacks me personally, or misrepresents what I say I will respond in kind. I'm not trying to bully anybody. If you read all my posts, I admitted maybe I was too harsh but when I heard Ellison was the first RFA tendered I don't see the logic behind that. And because I have 18 posts I somehow have less credibility or knowledge than someone with 3,000? Isn't that a person attack on me - telling me I'm an idiot or have no credibility because I haven't posted often? Sorry, but the poster you referenced attacked me first. He also stated argue Ellison is "highly coveted cover man"; that shows a lack of knowledge. I made the very sound point that Jauron saw him as a run-stuffer, not a cover man (as evidenced by the fact Ellison was not in the nickel package to start the season). You're entitled to your own opinion, not your own facts. I would think that a sports writer would be a little more able to read an statement, examine the facts, etc. Your guilty of doing the same thing you're accusing me of. And on top of that, you're wrong.

for someone who called someone out for failing to spell nickel correctly (though in Canada, it is spelled "nickle"), you seem to have an odd way of proving yourself, Mr. Webster.

though spell-checking and grammer, it appears, might be the least of your problems. the lack of coherence in the point you are trying to make -- and where did i ever refer to you as "an idiot" -- certainly goes a long way towards burying yourself. i would, humbly, suggest you stop digging any time soon.

 

jw

[kota]

You need to relax. Tendering a player doesn't mean he makes the team.

[manbeast]

Wilson just got tendered, 2nd rnd like purple Haze said.

Now for Incognito, B Scott, Schouman...

I believe we are tendering these players at offers that may get taken. But I thought Scott was a RFA but he is not he is an UFA.