major Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/view/238312-raiders-entire-roster-on-the-block
MDH Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 I will never wish the Bills to do what the Raiders are doing. The Raiders are the one franchise that makes the Bills look like they're well run.
ACor58 Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 The Raiders are the one franchise that makes the Bills look like they're well run. I am pretty sure that Raiders fans probably say the same thing about us.
MattyT Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 In all my years as an adult football fan, I've never seen or heard anyone say "I wish we could do what the Raiders are doing."
High Mark Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 We should probably go after some of their guys. Seriously.
bkc Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 putting them on the block and actually pulling the trigger are two different things
BuffaloBill Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 (edited) While it is Al Davis we're talking about - I take this to be no different than any other team when you get down to it. Arguably any team would trade any player if the trading team put up the right stuff. For example, the Colts might trade Manning for every Bills pick in the next two drafts. The issue is that in reality something like that would never happen. The Raiders are simply saying they would consider any trade not accept any trade. Edited October 18, 2010 by BuffaloBill
Dr. Trooth Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 The Bills are the Raiders East. Except the Raiders have actually won a couple of games.
Orton's Arm Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 I will never wish the Bills to do what the Raiders are doing. The Raiders are the one franchise that makes the Bills look like they're well run. Even a blind squirrel will sometimes find a nut. For a rebuilding team--such as the Bills or Raiders--putting the entire roster on the trading block makes a certain amount of sense. Of course, nothing obligates you to accept any given trade offer.
Red Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 The Raiders are changing, though man. They are getting better. Gradkowski is a solid QB. I thought so a couple of years ago. Just like Jeff Garcia. I think both QB's could have helped us when they were available. But the Bills did nothing. With the exception of Wood, Spiller, Williams, McKelvin, McGee, and Bryd, I would say the whole team is tradeable. Maybe we could trick the other team to take Modrak in the deal, and we'd be in great shape in no time.
vincec Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 In all my years as an adult football fan, I've never seen or heard anyone say "I wish we could do what the Raiders are doing." You must not be very old. The Raiders were one of the winningest and most admired football franchises in the NFL until the last few years. They have won 3 Super Bowls and appeared in two others. From 1963 to 2002 they only had 7 losing seasons. They have 20 players in the hall of fame. I could go on, but I'm sure you get the idea.
bigc14120 Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 We should probably go after some of their guys. Seriously. McClain!!!!!
The Dean Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 Even a blind squirrel will sometimes find a nut. For a rebuilding team--such as the Bills or Raiders--putting the entire roster on the trading block makes a certain amount of sense. Of course, nothing obligates you to accept any given trade offer. True. But given that philosophy, isn't virtually every player on every team available for a trade "for the right offer"?
Bill from NYC Posted October 18, 2010 Posted October 18, 2010 With the exception of Wood, Spiller, Williams, McKelvin, McGee, and Bryd, I would say the whole team is tradeable. Thys might be the worst nucleus of a football team in NFL history. If not, it is very close to it. McKelvin is barely a starter, and he has been replaced at returning kicks by a different gadget player. Wow.
The Dean Posted October 19, 2010 Posted October 19, 2010 Thys might be the worst nucleus of a football team in NFL history. If not, it is very close to it. McKelvin is barely a starter, and he has been replaced at returning kicks by a different gadget player. Wow. IMO McKelvin is well on his way to being a 1st tier CB in the NFL.
b stein 22 Posted October 19, 2010 Posted October 19, 2010 We need a linebacker McClain or that howard guy would be nice.
Bill from NYC Posted October 19, 2010 Posted October 19, 2010 IMO McKelvin is well on his way to being a 1st tier CB in the NFL. If you are 100% correct (and you may well be), we will have waited 3 years, and he was the #11 pick of an NFL draft. McKelvin is another ugly scar from Levy/Jauron.
Red Posted October 19, 2010 Posted October 19, 2010 (edited) Thys might be the worst nucleus of a football team in NFL history. If not, it is very close to it. McKelvin is barely a starter, and he has been replaced at returning kicks by a different gadget player. Wow. Well, if you are talking about the team status overall, then I would agree with you. But if you are mentioning the players I quoted as poor, I think that would be wrong on your part. What I don't like is that most of our talent is tied up in the secondary. Any team with a modicum of success has talent spread across the board- not concentrated solely in one position. If you are 100% correct (and you may well be), we will have waited 3 years, and he was the #11 pick of an NFL draft. McKelvin is another ugly scar from Levy/Jauron. I don't agree. Our secondary is on an island. We have no pass rush. A great secondary like ours would be incredible with a respectable pass rush. We don't get turnovers because opposing QB's are under no pressure to deliver the ball. The secondary can't stick to receivers all day. At some point, either we will get to the QB or the coverage will break down. In our case, it's the latter. If we can't get a QB in this draft, we have to get a pass rushing, offensive disrupting, DE. Edited October 19, 2010 by Red
vincec Posted October 19, 2010 Posted October 19, 2010 I don't agree. Our secondary is on an island. We have no pass rush. A great secondary like ours would be incredible with a respectable pass rush. We don't get turnovers because opposing QB's are under no pressure to deliver the ball. The secondary can't stick to receivers all day. At some point, either we will get to the QB or the coverage will break down. In our case, it's the latter. If we can't get a QB in this draft, we have to get a pass rushing, offensive disrupting, DE. If our secondary was really great then they would at least be a middle of the pack group without a pass rush. Almost anyone can look good with a strong pass rush in front of them. Great DBs make their pass rush look good by making the QB hold the ball- at least once in a while.
BuffalOhio Posted October 19, 2010 Posted October 19, 2010 If our secondary was really great then they would at least be a middle of the pack group without a pass rush. Almost anyone can look good with a strong pass rush in front of them. Great DBs make their pass rush look good by making the QB hold the ball- at least once in a while. When was the last time you saw anybody from the Bills threaten an opposing QB? Please, our biggest defensive problem is the front 7 and probably the scheme, too.
Recommended Posts