CosmicBills Posted February 29, 2012 Posted February 29, 2012 The funniest part is that with an Evans' catch and Kyle Williams holding onto the ball, we would have had a Joe Flacco vs. Alex Smith SB. Yup. And if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle.
Doc Posted February 29, 2012 Posted February 29, 2012 FYI, the Dols are reportedly bowing-out of the RGIII sweeptstakes because the price it too high. And they have a pick 2 spots higher.
Turbosrrgood Posted February 29, 2012 Posted February 29, 2012 I read from the Bills site that they interviewed with RGIII. I dont ask why because I dont like him, (would love him), but to be perfectly honest, we dont have the bullets to compete with the other suiters for the 2 pick... Why waste their and his time interviewing - to further tease themselves? Aaron Rodgers was supposed to be a top 3 pick, possible 1st overall and he fell to 24. Nobody knows exactly what will happen, no harm in interviewing him.
PDaDdy Posted February 29, 2012 Posted February 29, 2012 (edited) So ... you're saying that the key to winning football games is having a team that scores more points than it gives up? Nope that is not what I said. What I said is what I typed. Try responding to what I typed instead of paraphrasing and twisting the words. It's generally a good idea when having a discussion and you are trying to make a solid informed point that you reply with a statement not another question. We can get through this. I'm sure you can do it....well...maybe not...I'll give you the benefit of the doubt until you continue to prove otherwise Edited February 29, 2012 by PDaDdy
CosmicBills Posted February 29, 2012 Posted February 29, 2012 FYI, the Dols are reportedly bowing-out of the RGIII sweeptstakes because the price it too high. And they have a pick 2 spots higher. I hear ya, but I think it's all posturing. The truth is right now there is no rush for any team to make a move for the #2 pick. The Rams have all the cards right now, only fools would try to deal from a point of no leverage. Let Free Agency play out, see where Flynn and Manning land. Then let the clock start ticking after Indy officially selects Luck. That's when the deal will happen. St. Louis will still get a king's ransom, but it won't be as absurd as what they're asking for right now. All that said, I don't think the Bills will make a move for RG3.
Turbosrrgood Posted February 29, 2012 Posted February 29, 2012 (edited) trade up with Jacksonville and draft Robert Griffin III... next year we have a double headed MONSTER of Freddy and CJ running the ball. Healthy wide receivers, and big Tight End's to throw under... most importantly, with RG3 our o-line will have less pressure as he can manipulate the pocket almost every play... defenses will have a field day trying to guard the multiple options we can run every down (opens up Brad Smith even more)... _________ Kyle Williams back, and Dareus with experience our d-line is back in bizz... Aaron Williams with experience and our secondary creates more turnovers (like we saw in the beginning of the year) _________ we had a great draft last year and can afford to trade up, not to mention the Lynch trade pick we can move... DO IT BILLS, DO IT! Not that I'm against getting RG3 if we had the chance, but I think your view of this is a little distorted. Jags pick 7th, highly unlikely he will be there. Chandler is not signed, and Nix has signaled that he is not willing to offer big bucks to re-sign him. So right now the Bills have no big TE, or any NFL caliber TE signed for that matter. Similarly SJ is not signed, so currently we have no starting caliber WR's signed at the moment. Having a rookie QB likely would hurt, not help the O-line, especially when Fitz is adept at getting rid of the Ball quickly. Our D is switching schemes again, and has major holes. The Bills payed a boat load to Fitz, so don't expect the FO to mortgage away anything else for a replacement. Bottom line, the only way the Bills get RG3 is if he falls to them. Edited February 29, 2012 by Turbosrrgood
CosmicBills Posted February 29, 2012 Posted February 29, 2012 (edited) Try responding to what I typed instead of paraphrasing and twisting the words. Again with nothing. I will provide what I asked you before since your reading comprehension level isn't sufficient to determine what is a question (a sentence that ends with a "?") or a point. Question in bold. Points in italics. Hope this helps (mindless ramblings of a crazy person) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- So a defense that gives up 27.1 pts per game is how we make the playoffs? The very worst defense(regular season) that made the play offs was the Giants who barely snuck in at 9-7 while enduring a 1-5 losing stretch because it's defense wasn't healthy gave up 25 pts. When they got hot their defense was shutting teams down. The rest of the teams that made the play offs where as low as 14 pts per game with a couple in the LOW 20's. Doesn't that tell you something? (more rambling that doesn't add anything to the conversation ... you've still yet to make your point). Basically what I am trying to tell you is to actually think not just buy into the franchise QB passing league BS. (again, some of us are thinking more than others. you should try it. You still haven't made a point). Those things ARE important but there are so many other factors. (the irony is hilarious in this statement) What you need is a team that scores more than it gives up by a significant margin which leads to wins. (this is your entire point. Which is why I quoted it and responded to it). With the 3rd worst defense in the league giving up points we aren't going anywhere without huge upgrades there. Even if we had any of the consensus elite QBs like Brady we aren't going to average 35+ points a week with the other talent we have to over come our defensive ineptitude. (blah, blah, more incoherent rambling I did quote you. And responded to the only point you have actually made: "What you need is a team that scores more than it gives up" ... Thank you for your brilliance. Please, tell me more of this "score more than the other guy" doctrine you've invented. Edited February 29, 2012 by tgreg99
Doc Posted February 29, 2012 Posted February 29, 2012 I hear ya, but I think it's all posturing. The truth is right now there is no rush for any team to make a move for the #2 pick. The Rams have all the cards right now, only fools would try to deal from a point of no leverage. Let Free Agency play out, see where Flynn and Manning land. Then let the clock start ticking after Indy officially selects Luck. That's when the deal will happen. St. Louis will still get a king's ransom, but it won't be as absurd as what they're asking for right now. All that said, I don't think the Bills will make a move for RG3. Sure there is a rush to make a move for the #2 pick. Free agency will happen before the draft and Manning and Flynn will be FA's. The Rams know this and realize that if 2 teams within the top-10 (worst case scenario for them, the Skins and Dols) fill their need at QB with one of them, that leaves the other (Browns) to potentially sit back and wait for RGIII to fall to them or make a trade at #3.
CosmicBills Posted February 29, 2012 Posted February 29, 2012 Sure there is a rush to make a move for the #2 pick. Free agency will happen before the draft and Manning and Flynn will be FA's. The Rams know this and realize that if 2 teams within the top-10 (worst case scenario for them, the Skins and Dols) fill their need at QB with one of them, that leaves the other (Browns) to potentially sit back and wait for RGIII to fall to them or make a trade at #3. The only ones rushing to make a deal before the draft are the Rams to avoid dealing from a position of lesser leverage. The Browns know they can make the best offer -- why would they rush to make a move now? If the Dolphins or Redskins try to make a deal before the draft, the Rams certainly will call the Browns to let them know and give them a chance to counter. If I'm the Browns, I let the Rams sweat.
Doc Posted February 29, 2012 Posted February 29, 2012 The only ones rushing to make a deal before the draft are the Rams to avoid dealing from a position of lesser leverage. The Browns know they can make the best offer -- why would they rush to make a move now? If the Dolphins or Redskins try to make a deal before the draft, the Rams certainly will call the Browns to let them know and give them a chance to counter. If I'm the Browns, I let the Rams sweat. You said the Rams held all the cards. They don't since once FA begins and QB's start moving, they may be left holding the bag if the Skins and Dols move on with other QB plans. I agree the Browns should sit tight, because even if they don't talk with the Rams about trading up, the Rams will take the other offers they get and see if the Browns want to match them, so they only have to move back 2 spots instead of 4 or 8.
Bronc24 Posted February 29, 2012 Posted February 29, 2012 The only ones rushing to make a deal before the draft are the Rams to avoid dealing from a position of lesser leverage. The Browns know they can make the best offer -- why would they rush to make a move now? If the Dolphins or Redskins try to make a deal before the draft, the Rams certainly will call the Browns to let them know and give them a chance to counter. If I'm the Browns, I let the Rams sweat. I wonder if PDad is capable of a coherent, well thought out post like this.
PDaDdy Posted February 29, 2012 Posted February 29, 2012 (edited) I did quote you. And responded to the only point you have actually made: "What you need is a team that scores more than it gives up" ... Thank you for your brilliance. Please, tell me more of this "score more than the other guy" doctrine you've invented. Your lack of reading comprehension is legendary. The sentences with the question marks at the end....try responding to those not that you have any rebuttal to them. Your sophomoric simplification of the statement lacks the nuance of the point I made. You need an offense that outscores what your defense allows by a significant margin. To phrase it another way we need a defense that gives up less than our offense scores by a significant margin. This my simple man gives you two options; improve an offense that despite the incredible rash of injuries yet again this year averaged 23.2 pts per game which was 14th best in the league OR improve the defense that gave up on average 27.1 pts per game and was 30th in the league. For comparison sake the 5th ranked offense in weekly scoring only scored 25.4 pts a week. Even if we improved our offense to 5th best in the ENTIRE league we would score a whopping 2 additional pts a week and STILL average less than our defense gives up! The choice once again is obvious If you don't get that ...I guess you don't get it. Edited February 29, 2012 by PDaDdy
Billsrhody Posted February 29, 2012 Posted February 29, 2012 My link Interesting article here about a "mystery" team that is looking into trading up to #2 for RG III. Main points: - If the bills cut Fitzpatrick before March 19, they will save $49 million of his $59 million deal. - The bills have been stuck in mediocrity (or worse) for years and need a shot in the arm more than almost any other team. - RG III would rejuvenate a franchise in desperate need of savior. Lets say for the sake of argument that it would cost this years 1st round pick and next years 1st and 3rd round picks. I know this is extreme... but would you do it?
1B4IDie Posted February 29, 2012 Posted February 29, 2012 (edited) Why not trade up for Luck? Has everyone forgotten about Luck now that RGIII ran really fast in track shoes and an unitard? If they are going to do this why wouldn't they do this in 2011 when they had the #3 overall and only needed to move up two slots to get the Arguably better prospect in Cam Newton? Edited February 29, 2012 by Why So Serious?
CodeMonkey Posted February 29, 2012 Posted February 29, 2012 Mortgage 2 drafts for him? No. If the Bills were close to being a complete team and only needed a QB then maybe, but not with the laundry list of needs that they have now.
DrDawkinstein Posted February 29, 2012 Posted February 29, 2012 Why not trade up for Luck? Has everyone forgotten about Luck now that RGIII ran really fast in track shoes and an unitard? If they are going to do this why wouldn't they do this in 2011 when they had the #3 overall and only needed to move up two slots to get the Arguably better prospect in Cam Newton? While you raise a good question, neither Carolina or Indy are interested in trading out of the #1 spot. That is the difference.
NoSaint Posted February 29, 2012 Posted February 29, 2012 My link Interesting article here about a "mystery" team that is looking into trading up to #2 for RG III. Main points: - If the bills cut Fitzpatrick before March 19, they will save $49 million of his $59 million deal. - The bills have been stuck in mediocrity (or worse) for years and need a shot in the arm more than almost any other team. - RG III would rejuvenate a franchise in desperate need of savior. Lets say for the sake of argument that it would cost this years 1st round pick and next years 1st and 3rd round picks. I know this is extreme... but would you do it? Because that wouldn't even get you close to the 2 pick. Further I think you keep fitz this year either way.
DrDawkinstein Posted February 29, 2012 Posted February 29, 2012 Lets say for the sake of argument that it would cost this years 1st round pick and next years 1st and 3rd round picks. I know this is extreme... but would you do it? From recent reports, it's going to take much much more than that to move up. A better question would be, what is the maximum you are willing to spend to move up? This years 1st and 2nd, and next years 1st and 3rd? What then?
NoSaint Posted February 29, 2012 Posted February 29, 2012 You said the Rams held all the cards. They don't since once FA begins and QB's start moving, they may be left holding the bag if the Skins and Dols move on with other QB plans. I agree the Browns should sit tight, because even if they don't talk with the Rams about trading up, the Rams will take the other offers they get and see if the Browns want to match them, so they only have to move back 2 spots instead of 4 or 8. Even if only the browns are chasing(they won't be the only), they still can hold them hostage for quite the ransom.
K-9 Posted February 29, 2012 Posted February 29, 2012 My link Interesting article here about a "mystery" team that is looking into trading up to #2 for RG III. Main points: - If the bills cut Fitzpatrick before March 19, they will save $49 million of his $59 million deal. - The bills have been stuck in mediocrity (or worse) for years and need a shot in the arm more than almost any other team. - RG III would rejuvenate a franchise in desperate need of savior. Lets say for the sake of argument that it would cost this years 1st round pick and next years 1st and 3rd round picks. I know this is extreme... but would you do it? That's less than it cost us to obtain Bennett, an OLB taken at #2 overall, 25 years ago. I doubt the Rams would even consider that with what Cleveland has to offer potentially. I'd do it in a heartbeat if they'd agree to it though. GO BILLS!!!
Recommended Posts