Beerball Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 I think BB , and excuse my forwardness please both of you. But We dont have the Nix guy. The big wide radiused mismatch who can go up and get it. We have juke , we have speed we have smooth , we dont have big . Unless Ramses blows us away : ) I get that. Jackson is a much better version of a couple WR's already on the team. To say "we don't need him" tells me that someone believes that he is equal to or worse than the Bills current WR's. I have no issue with someone (including the FO) taking his baggage into account when deciding whether or not to go after him. To say though that "we don't need him" is a totally different story and one that I do take issue with. The goal is to put the best possible 11 out there on offense and the best possible 11 out there on defense. Would Jackson make the WR ranks better? Now...if signing Jackson led the FO to say "we don't need to draft a WR" that I'd take exception to as well. Jackson won't change the team's draft plans one bit (IMO) unless they were looking at drafting another smurf (which I hope they weren't).
NoSaint Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 Let me ask this question. Whats the difference between "urban" gangs and motorcycle gangs. They are just as dangerous. Sometimes more so I have to ask why it's being asked? Biker gangs don't really seem to have a place in the discussion
Beerball Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 I have to ask why it's being asked? Biker gangs don't really seem to have a place in the discussion Ruben Brown is considering a comeback.
3rdand12 Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 I get that. Jackson is a much better version of a couple WR's already on the team. To say "we don't need him" tells me that someone believes that he is equal to or worse than the Bills current WR's. I have no issue with someone (including the FO) taking his baggage into account when deciding whether or not to go after him. To say though that "we don't need him" is a totally different story and one that I do take issue with. The goal is to put the best possible 11 out there on offense and the best possible 11 out there on defense. Would Jackson make the WR ranks better? Now...if signing Jackson led the FO to say "we don't need to draft a WR" that I'd take exception to as well. Jackson won't change the team's draft plans one bit (IMO) unless they were looking at drafting another smurf (which I hope they weren't). The teams mantra i would expect to be to push for better at each position . My concern is more about value. Cant Bills call some plays that Jackson would fit into by just using Spiller or Goodwin ? Sure Jackson has proven it and certainly is talented as heck. But i see overlap in skill sets. That and the potential money thing are my issues. I am not opposed to having him on the Bills. I would be ecstatic actually.
Maury Ballstein Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 Goodwin and Graham are a poor or very poor mans version of Jackson IMO. I have no problem seeing either of the two lose playing time or employment with the bills.
Beerball Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 Goodwin and Graham are a poor or very poor mans version of Jackson IMO. I have no problem seeing either of the two lose playing time or employment with the bills. I'm always afraid when we agree. Why is that?
NoSaint Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 (edited) The teams mantra i would expect to be to push for better at each position . My concern is more about value. Cant Bills call some plays that Jackson would fit into by just using Spiller or Goodwin ? Sure Jackson has proven it and certainly is talented as heck. But i see overlap in skill sets. That and the potential money thing are my issues. I am not opposed to having him on the Bills. I would be ecstatic actually. I think the overlap is highly overrated by fans in most cases. I'm not saying I want him, but he'd immediately be the most talented player on the offense potentially. Obviously, it's not that simple As he does have a ton of questions and potential drawbacks... But talent is talent and none of our receivers have proven to match his proven ability, unless your only looking at 40 times. And I'll say, heaven forbid Goodwin plays great, suddenly your asking a team to matchup two (or 3 with cj) elite speed guys and I don't know that most defenses have the depth of guys that are both fast and skilled enough to matchup with that and it's thanks to the uniqueness of the redundancy. Edited March 30, 2014 by NoSaint
Spillnation Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 If the redskins grab Desean then there interest in Britt would probably be gone. Does that leave Buffalo as Britts landing spot? I'd love to have Jackson but his pay check is a little steep and Britt will probably be had for cheap. Obviously Jackson is the better pick up because you know you're getting a pro bowler who produces but Britt could be a steal if he returns to form... Looking at it from all angles including the financial aspect who do you think has the most value and is the better pick up?
ko12010 Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 These hypothetical threads are useless and annoying.
3rdand12 Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 I think the overlap is highly overrated by fans in most cases. I'm not saying I want him, but he'd immediately be the most talented player on the offense potentially. Obviously, it's not that simple As he does have a ton of questions and potential drawbacks... But talent is talent and none of our receivers have proven to match his proven ability, unless your only looking at 40 times. And I'll say, heaven forbid Goodwin plays great, suddenly your asking a team to matchup two (or 3 with cj) elite speed guys and I don't know that most defenses have the depth of guys that are both fast and skilled enough to matchup with that and it's thanks to the uniqueness of the redundancy. well sir i believe that was the intent of bills staff last season. open up the underside with a dual speed threat . we couldnt get the ball to them (caught ) often enough
YoloinOhio Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 ProFootballTalk @ProFootballTalk 25m Jets G.M. John Idzik apparently not sold on DeSean Jackson http://wp.me/p14QSB-9rVz
Tsaikotic Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 I thought Britt signed in Seattle? No? nope..he's still mulling over where he wants to play...
Bob Malooga Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 (edited) Desean Jackson does NOT fit in Buffalo...can we please drop that idea, already? I'd rather develop Woods and Goodwin, than sign Jackson. As for Britt, his most logical landing spot is St. Louis with the head coach who drafted him...their GM says it's 50/50 they sign Kenny Britt. If I have to pick one, I'd pick Britt...but if I have to sign a WR with knee issues, I might just take a look at Danario Alexander...bigger/faster/cheaper than Britt. (I also don't think D-Jax leaves D.C. without a contract...get to play with RG3, in the NFC East against Philly? He will sign in Washington.) Edited March 30, 2014 by Bob Malooga
FluffHead Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 Desean Jackson does NOT fit in Buffalo...can we please drop that idea, already? I'd rather develop Woods and Goodwin, than sign Jackson. You'll have to talk to Doug Whaley about that because he believes Jackson does fit.
Kirby Jackson Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 Please change title Thanks, I opened this expecting some sort of breaking news.
PromoTheRobot Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 Goodwin and Graham are a poor or very poor mans version of Jackson IMO. I have no problem seeing either of the two lose playing time or employment with the bills. DIdn't DJ once spike the ball before crossing the goal line?
NewEra Posted March 30, 2014 Posted March 30, 2014 These hypothetical threads are useless and annoying.
Recommended Posts