Glass To The Arson Posted May 12, 2010 Posted May 12, 2010 Do you think our recent cutting of players is based on how well they mentally prepared themselves? Do you think Gailey thought those players couldn't handle the playbook? What is your take on the switch up? I'd like to know why we would cut a no name and sign a no name
FutureBillsGM Posted May 12, 2010 Posted May 12, 2010 Do you think our recent cutting of players is based on how well they mentally prepared themselves? Do you think Gailey thought those players couldn't handle the playbook? What is your take on the switch up? I'd like to know why we would cut a no name and sign a no name Because the no names we had showed they didn't even belong on the field with the other no names we had during minicamps.
Gabe Northern Posted May 12, 2010 Posted May 12, 2010 Favorite was beat out by Lonnie Harvey. Favorite is better suited for the 3 in a one-gap scheme.
VanCity Posted May 12, 2010 Posted May 12, 2010 I am always intrigued by the pre-camp cuts. These guys must have either been a) unprepared or b) not as good as the others that were in rookie camp. I'm going to vote for b because that insinuates that we have improved. Gotta go with that.
DanInUticaTampa Posted May 12, 2010 Posted May 12, 2010 I am always intrigued by the pre-camp cuts. These guys must have either been a) unprepared or b) not as good as the others that were in rookie camp. I'm going to vote for b because that insinuates that we have improved. Gotta go with that. I love the glass is half full attitude
VanCity Posted May 12, 2010 Posted May 12, 2010 I love the glass is half full attitude If you are a pessimist, try not to be a Bills fan. It will only gray your hair faster....
Art in PNS Posted May 12, 2010 Posted May 12, 2010 Do you think our recent cutting of players is based on how well they mentally prepared themselves? Do you think Gailey thought those players couldn't handle the playbook? What is your take on the switch up? I'd like to know why we would cut a no name and sign a no name They need extra bodies for the rookie camp , and the staff gets to evaluate fill ins in case of injury later. The next camp will have the vets and they won't have time to evaluate the 4th and fifth position players.
playman Posted May 12, 2010 Posted May 12, 2010 well, every roster move now is insignificant ( spelling? ) its the final roster that counts. until then, nothing new
RealityCheck Posted May 12, 2010 Posted May 12, 2010 Do you think our recent cutting of players is based on how well they mentally prepared themselves? Do you think Gailey thought those players couldn't handle the playbook? What is your take on the switch up? I'd like to know why we would cut a no name and sign a no name Just baby steps bro.
Sisyphean Bills Posted May 12, 2010 Posted May 12, 2010 I am always intrigued by the pre-camp cuts. These guys must have either been a) unprepared or b) not as good as the others that were in rookie camp. I'm going to vote for b because that insinuates that we have improved. Gotta go with that. There's a difference between (a) and (b)? If you don't know the play and can't pick up what the coach is dishing out, the guy that is .001 seconds slower in his underwear on the track is going to take your opportunity and run right past you.
RalphW Posted May 13, 2010 Posted May 13, 2010 Do you think our recent cutting of players is based on how well they mentally prepared themselves? Do you think Gailey thought those players couldn't handle the playbook? What is your take on the switch up? I'd like to know why we would cut a no name and sign a no name Don't over think it.....they sucked. End of story.
apuszczalowski Posted May 13, 2010 Posted May 13, 2010 These players are camp fodder guys that were brought in to fill out the roster during camps. The coaches either didn't like what they saw from these guys, or saw enough to know that they weren't what they needed and let them go. Nothing more, nothing less. Coaches use this time to evaluate guys that may be called upon later in the year to fill depth spots in case of injury, or they are brought in with hopes that they may have found a "diamond in the rough" player
GR8PRKN Posted May 13, 2010 Posted May 13, 2010 These players are camp fodder guys that were brought in to fill out the roster during camps. The coaches either didn't like what they saw from these guys, or saw enough to know that they weren't what they needed and let them go. Nothing more, nothing less. Coaches use this time to evaluate guys that may be called upon later in the year to fill depth spots in case of injury, or they are brought in with hopes that they may have found a "diamond in the rough" player Yep Exactly..
Green Lightning Posted May 13, 2010 Posted May 13, 2010 Preview and stockpile of names for next year's lockout.
The Wiz Posted May 13, 2010 Posted May 13, 2010 If you are a pessimist, try not to be a Bills fan. It will only gray your hair faster.... I thought being a pessimist was a requirement to be a Bills fan?
eball Posted May 13, 2010 Posted May 13, 2010 I thought being a pessimist was a requirement to be a Bills fan? Except the pessimists will go out of their way to tell you they are merely "realists."
CountDorkula Posted May 13, 2010 Posted May 13, 2010 What, no "they're making room for Gaither" posts? ....because they are obviously making room for Gaither. They need to cut some players and salaries to bring him in and sign him. Hows that?
PS 56 Posted May 13, 2010 Posted May 13, 2010 Preview and stockpile of names for next year's lockout. Best explanation ever....
Phil Hansen Forever Posted May 13, 2010 Posted May 13, 2010 If you are a pessimist, try not to be a Bills fan. It will only gray your hair faster.... AMEN!
Recommended Posts