Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Absolutely puzzling to me why we didn't sign him. A one-year deal....

 

We didn't sign him because had we signed him, one of Bradham or Alanzo would have been relegated to 2nd string. Our coaching staff knows they want Bradham and Alanzo to be the starters going forward, so, by signing Dansby we'd of been stunting, or postponing, the development of either of these guys by a year. And, since I'm assuming our staff thinks this year will be competitive, but NEXT year will be, realistically, our championship run starting year - they'd want to get all the growing pains out of the way THIS YEAR. There won't be time for that stuff next year, so much.

 

I'm all on board with this - and especially so if it means Manuel starts this year, too. Lets let these young guys who are going to be our nucleus get accustomed to the NFL and get their war scars together!

BTW - this doesn't mean we'll suck this year. I really think we'll be making improvements as the year goes on and will be knocking on the WildCard door come December. Football isn't as hard as some of our previous coaches have made it out to be - it is only as hard as any particular coach MAKES IT OUT TO BE. We're going to be fighters this year, and we're going to surprise some people.

Edited by KeisterHollow
  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

and next to Da'Rick, the next best UDFA this year for Bills is probably ILB Keith Pough... seems to have some promise. two of the best ILBs of recent Ravens/Jets defenses were UD as well, so not like there isn't a track record (Ellerbe, Bart Scott).

Posted

I say we still need help in ILB. Alonso has a lot of potential is really the only one we added, and that is with the loss of shepard. And Alonso has a history of getting injured, so if he gets injured, who starts in the middle? Bradham and Moats? unless that UFA rookie pulls out some surprises early on, this unit has me nervous more than any other. I can only assume they are hoping a few solid options get cut as cap casualties and they sign someone on the cheap.

 

This concerns me also. If we are going to use the 3-4 more this year, it would seem we need more depth here, as I'm not even sure without looking at the depth chart who would back those guys up if one is injured.

Posted

That's precisely the message. It's the reason why we won't make a play for a guy like Charles Woodson too, who, IMO, would be a steal on a one-year deal and give us a terrific secondary (and some insurance if Byrd holds out).

 

This would also be a perfectly acceptable approach, if this were only the first rebuild. But we are on rebuild no. 5.

 

And so the alternative would be...?

Posted

Seems like the perfect thing to post in the existing Dansby thread

 

Which, if you take the time to look, was actually closed and locked a little while back, hot shot.

Posted

I get the sense that this new regime is sick and tired of players like this using us to try to get better deals elswhere......

 

[Cough, cough] BYRD [Cough, cough, cough]

Posted

 

 

Never heard this until just now. Not calling you a liar, but if you have a link, that'd be great.

this

 

 

 

Which, if you take the time to look, was actually closed and locked a little while back, hot shot.

thank you. Now I don't have to be the @$$hole. Lol
Posted

Which, if you take the time to look, was actually closed and locked a little while back, hot shot.

 

this is how you do it......point awarded to Rubes. :thumbsup:

 

thwarted off jeremy2020.......every thread needs a jeremy disapproval i thought? it's kinda his thing.

Posted (edited)

 

 

[Cough, cough] BYRD [Cough, cough, cough]

well said.

 

FWIW, I don't think Byrd will be a Bill again. I just hope we get at least one 1st rounder for him. Preferably a 1st + additional.

Edited by mrags
Posted

Which, if you take the time to look, was actually closed and locked a little while back, hot shot.

 

My apologies. I didn't look to see it was closed by a moderator.

Posted

And so the alternative would be...?

 

The alternative to a 5th rebuild would be to wake up the new NFL. This is no longer a league where there are 3-year rebuilding plans. Teams go from losers to winners in a single offseason now. Rookie QB's come right in and have success.

 

There is no reason we can't develop young guys, while also sign a few key vets here and there to give us immediate production.

Posted

We didn't sign him because had we signed him, one of Bradham or Alanzo would have been relegated to 2nd string. Our coaching staff knows they want Bradham and Alanzo to be the starters going forward, so, by signing Dansby we'd of been stunting, or postponing, the development of either of these guys by a year. And, since I'm assuming our staff thinks this year will be competitive, but NEXT year will be, realistically, our championship run starting year - they'd want to get all the growing pains out of the way THIS YEAR. There won't be time for that stuff next year, so much.

 

I'm all on board with this - and especially so if it means Manuel starts this year, too. Lets let these young guys who are going to be our nucleus get accustomed to the NFL and get their war scars together!

BTW - this doesn't mean we'll suck this year. I really think we'll be making improvements as the year goes on and will be knocking on the WildCard door come December. Football isn't as hard as some of our previous coaches have made it out to be - it is only as hard as any particular coach MAKES IT OUT TO BE. We're going to be fighters this year, and we're going to surprise some people.

I like your positive attitude Keister. I am in total agreement that we WILL be competitive this year...Not Super Bowl bound, but competitive week in and week out..
Posted

The alternative to a 5th rebuild would be to wake up the new NFL. This is no longer a league where there are 3-year rebuilding plans. Teams go from losers to winners in a single offseason now. Rookie QB's come right in and have success.

 

There is no reason we can't develop young guys, while also sign a few key vets here and there to give us immediate production.

 

There's also no reason that programs need rely upon free agent veterans in order to have success.

 

We'll be starting last year's 4th rounder and this year's 2nd rounder at ILB.

Posted

Good we didn't need him. Our defensive staff knows him well enough and I'm sure that if he fit what we were planning to do then a deal would have been done.

Posted

My apologies. I didn't look to see it was closed by a moderator.

It was not closed by a moderator. It was closed by thread starter (me) for it was 25+ pages and no longer seemed connected to Bills. Plus with software board bug it is hard to read such threads.

Posted

 

Teams can only make offers that are in their best interest.

Players can only take offers that are in their best interest.

Nothing you can do but move on.

 

 

If Nix thought this team was close and this player was the missing piece to the puzzle then a one year deal would make complete sense.

With so much turnover I certainly don't think this is any more than a[nother] rebuild year.

Signing an expensive one year deal in a rebuild year makes no sense at all.

 

Haven't you heard?? We're gonna go 11-3!!

×
×
  • Create New...