ieatcrayonz Posted September 7, 2011 Posted September 7, 2011 I don't give a crap whether the GM says what's PC. The bottom line is that Buddy is a straight shooter....... He's a PC straight shooter? Unless you're talking about his ability to fling a desktop machine across the room, that is basically impossible. BTW I think all the baloney is ok for the most part. I'm not a real fan of him slamming the skills of former players in public but whatever. I think the stuff about Hangartner is true even if Jauron didn't think so. The slamming of Evans' abilities? We'll see I guess. Not nice. As for the Jasper thing -- I believe Buddy was just having fun with the hosts, but once again I find it curious that NOBODY believes perhaps Buddy & co. might actually be capable of a little gamesmanship. By not showcasing Jasper at OT during the preseason, and then signing him to the PS where he can practice fully with the team, the Bills essentially gain additional OT depth without having to cut another position player on the 53-man roster. If injuries happen during the season or Jasper shows he's ready, he can be activated. God forbid the Bills actually have some shrewd football people. Wasting a whole pre-season worth of potential practice is now known as gamesmanship? He's a 7th rounder so it's a bonus if he makes it anyway but geez, isn't it possible that they simply discovered he stinks at DT and they're giving him a long shot chance at OT? Does everything have to be an indication of our genius?
Delete This Account Posted September 7, 2011 Posted September 7, 2011 (edited) This sort of kills the absurd theory put forth by Sully and others that Overdorf traded Evans without Nix or Gailey knowing about it. i don't know if that's the way anyone has phrased it. jw ADD: heck, NGU might even agree with me on this. Edited September 7, 2011 by john wawrow
Ramius Posted September 7, 2011 Posted September 7, 2011 Some things just don't add up: 1. This is now what, the 3rd or 4th different reason we've been given for Evans being traded. Why the constant changing of the story? 2. If money was no object, why did buddy come out BEFORE free agency and tell everyone we weren't going to make any splashes to improve the team? 3. And the OL being better than last year is simply laughable. Perhaps the OL played so poorly in the preseason so buddy could "hide" how good they were? Sounds as if Buddy is in "damage control" mode. And the fact that after 11 years of complete crap on the field, some of you guys keep drinknig the kool-aid is a joke. There's been 1 constant all these years, and it is still in place. There's where the problem lies.
eball Posted September 7, 2011 Author Posted September 7, 2011 Wasting a whole pre-season worth of potential practice is now known as gamesmanship? He's a 7th rounder so it's a bonus if he makes it anyway but geez, isn't it possible that they simply discovered he stinks at DT and they're giving him a long shot chance at OT? Does everything have to be an indication of our genius? Quite the contrary. Around here, it's accepted as a foregone conclusion the Bills can't walk and chew gum at the same time. While that may have been true for the better part of the decade, there's been "a new sheriff in town" for the past 20 months and there are signs everyone isn't a complete dipschit. Maybe the Bills tried to put one over on the rest of the league, maybe they didn't. But it's an interesting discussion.
LabattBlue Posted September 7, 2011 Posted September 7, 2011 Not that it will make a difference until the 3 stooges(Wilson, Littman & Overdorf) are gone, but I believe Nix will be riding off into the sunset by the end of next season.
bbfan24 Posted September 7, 2011 Posted September 7, 2011 He tells it how it is...love that about him.
eball Posted September 7, 2011 Author Posted September 7, 2011 Some things just don't add up: 1. This is now what, the 3rd or 4th different reason we've been given for Evans being traded. Why the constant changing of the story? We've apparently read or heard different things, because nothing I've heard directly out of Nix or Gailey are anything different than what Buddy said yesterday. BEFORE the trade, of course we would not have heard this, but does everyone suddenly (and conveniently) forget the specific comments from Chan during camp that "we need to get Lee involved in more" than just the deep route? Looking back, it was pretty obvious Evans wasn't a good fit here. 2. If money was no object, why did buddy come out BEFORE free agency and tell everyone we weren't going to make any splashes to improve the team? The two halves of your sentence are not mutually exclusive. Buddy has said "100 times" he doesn't go for the big FA "splash" and wants to build a team differently. That doesn't mean he has budgetary restrictions being imposed upon him. 3. And the OL being better than last year is simply laughable. Perhaps the OL played so poorly in the preseason so buddy could "hide" how good they were? The 1st string OL played pretty well during the preseason, and Gailey messed around with some guys to get them some time at different positions. Buddy acknowledged OL depth is a significant concern. He was also very frank about being interested in Clabo but felt the player was simply using Buffalo to jack up his price with the Falcons (something a lot of us surmised as well). Sounds as if Buddy is in "damage control" mode. And the fact that after 11 years of complete crap on the field, some of you guys keep drinknig the kool-aid is a joke. There's been 1 constant all these years, and it is still in place. There's where the problem lies. Couldn't disagree more. I don't hear Buddy coming across as defensive, frustrated, emasculated, or anything of the kind. How many times do we have to hear Buffalo execs say Ralph isn't tightening the purse strings before we believe it? Maybe he just had nitwits making the decisions until now?
Dorkington Posted September 7, 2011 Posted September 7, 2011 I don't get how Buddy slammed Evans? He said what we all know... Evans is a great guy and a good deep threat. The Bills would rather have guys who are better runners across the middle. Everyone has their strengths and their weaknesses. What next, someone getting insulted when it's suggested that Roscoe isn't a big receiver?
LabattBlue Posted September 7, 2011 Posted September 7, 2011 I don't get how Buddy slammed Evans? He said what we all know... Evans is a great guy and a good deep threat. The Bills would rather have guys who are better runners across the middle. Everyone has their strengths and their weaknesses. What next, someone getting insulted when it's suggested that Roscoe isn't a big receiver? Yeah...who needs a guy who can stretch defenses. Let's just get another guy who is good at running 5 yard patterns across the middle. That way defenses can just have more guys closer to the line of scrimmage.
bowery4 Posted September 7, 2011 Posted September 7, 2011 Thanks for posting the interview OP and the link (others). If the FO is worried about what is said on this web site, we should all stop fighting about it what they say and keep trying to make good suggestions about what they should do. Right now, I think they should take a look at Ryan Cook after the vet guarantees are done with next week ,(when I think) we will pick up another guy or two. I like the guy, (Minnesota signed 2 year contract after the lock out) plays all positions on the line, 28 years old, played rt for them when AD was having very big years, came back to be a guard this year but they have newer younger guys and a new staff. IMO a Nix type of vet pick up.
shibuya Posted September 7, 2011 Posted September 7, 2011 out of all the forums.. this one has the least amount of conspiracy theorists on it. I'm pleasantly surprised... I'm so sick and tired of the gloom and doom crew(s) constantly playing for an angle and spending 7 pages arguing and defending their "out to get us" mentality
eball Posted September 7, 2011 Author Posted September 7, 2011 Yeah...who needs a guy who can stretch defenses. Let's just get another guy who is good at running 5 yard patterns across the middle. That way defenses can just have more guys closer to the line of scrimmage. Sure. Because it's just that simple, and Lee Evans was the only guy who can run more than 10 yards downfield. Did you catch the 52-yarder to Stevie vs. the Jags? I'm glad Lee was there to clear out the other side...wait, he wasn't? Never mind.
Dorkington Posted September 7, 2011 Posted September 7, 2011 (edited) I don't give a crap whether the GM says what's PC. The bottom line is that Buddy is a straight shooter and hasn't, that I've seen, said anything proven later to be untrue or dishonest. Miserable grouches like you keep harping on the last decade and aren't willing to give this new regime even a second season before claiming they're liars and frauds. Buffalo didn't do anything "flashy" this offseason, and the "typical" fan only cares about big name free agents or front-page trades. So yes, when the team hasn't sniffed the playoffs in 12 years it's no surprise ST sales are down. With only a single-digit number of players left on the roster from 2007, it's clear significant efforts have been made to change the composition and culture of the organization. It's a shame you're so goddamned impatient. As for the Jasper thing -- I believe Buddy was just having fun with the hosts, but once again I find it curious that NOBODY believes perhaps Buddy & co. might actually be capable of a little gamesmanship. By not showcasing Jasper at OT during the preseason, and then signing him to the PS where he can practice fully with the team, the Bills essentially gain additional OT depth without having to cut another position player on the 53-man roster. If injuries happen during the season or Jasper shows he's ready, he can be activated. God forbid the Bills actually have some shrewd football people. Yeah...who needs a guy who can stretch defenses. Let's just get another guy who is good at running 5 yard patterns across the middle. That way defenses can just have more guys closer to the line of scrimmage. I wasn't commenting on if I think it was a good move or not. Nix thinks it was, from what I've seen of our offense, it makes sense. But at the same time, I do fear that not having an established deep threat will crowd things. I guess that's why we play the games. Point is, stating the obvious pros and cons of a player is NOT a "slam". Edited September 7, 2011 by Dorkington
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted September 7, 2011 Posted September 7, 2011 I used to somewhat trust Buddy Nix in interviews. I like that he sounds like a straight shooter. And I like him as a GM. I think he is doing all he can. But I think that Jasper thing is complete and utter bullschitt. +1 Sounds like a nice post hoc excuse to justify the move.
LabattBlue Posted September 7, 2011 Posted September 7, 2011 Sure. Because it's just that simple, and Lee Evans was the only guy who can run more than 10 yards downfield. Did you catch the 52-yarder to Stevie vs. the Jags? I'm glad Lee was there to clear out the other side...wait, he wasn't? Never mind. I was responding to a post that contained this statement... "The Bills would rather have guys who are better runners across the middle."
Doc Posted September 7, 2011 Posted September 7, 2011 +1 Sounds like a nice post hoc excuse to justify the move. Justify the move...to whom? And why? It's not like he was a high pick or is taking up a valuable roster spot.
BobChalmers Posted September 7, 2011 Posted September 7, 2011 I will add on a serious note that I feel this offseason they are making a lot of good moves, where as last year I didnt think so. The draft, Trent Edwards, who they started where, etc. A lot of that probably had to do with a new staff coming in not really sure what they had to work with, and feeling like they needed to try out the veeterans first to see what was what.
Rockinon Posted September 7, 2011 Posted September 7, 2011 I wasn't commenting on if I think it was a good move or not. Nix thinks it was, from what I've seen of our offense, it makes sense. But at the same time, I do fear that not having an established deep threat will crowd things. I guess that's why we play the games. Point is, stating the obvious pros and cons of a player is NOT a "slam". Who says we have no deep threat? I think there will be plenty of plays going over the top of the defense. Remember Jerry Rice? He was a continuous deep threat but his track time was far from what you'd call elite speed.
BobChalmers Posted September 7, 2011 Posted September 7, 2011 (edited) Yeah...who needs a guy who can stretch defenses. Let's just get another guy who is good at running 5 yard patterns across the middle. That way defenses can just have more guys closer to the line of scrimmage. Too bad Lee Evans hasn't been that guy for the past two seasons, then he might have been worth keeping, eh? A 40 catch/4 TD deep threat is no threat at all and not doing any good as a decoy, much less as an imaginary #1 WR. Evans has been mailing it in for three years now - I don't doubt he may pick up his game for a season with the Ravens, but he wasn't doing it for the Bills, and he didn't deserve to start over the younger guys. Edited September 7, 2011 by BobChalmers
Dorkington Posted September 7, 2011 Posted September 7, 2011 Who says we have no deep threat? I think there will be plenty of plays going over the top of the defense. Remember Jerry Rice? He was a continuous deep threat but his track time was far from what you'd call elite speed. *Established* deep threat. We have guys that can go deep, but they are unproven, young, etc. Nix, I assume, has confidence in them... but I don't know that opposing teams do, which could crowd the short/medium routes in the mean time.
Recommended Posts