Johnny Hammersticks Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 John Wendling just high-jumped off a building. Loved me some John Wendling. Still don't understand why he was let go. Special teams monster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 I don't know what's being discussed on WGR, or what was talked about in the other 20 pages of this thread that I'm not going to go back and read, but this could have perhaps been a sheer genius move, because it puts a hole at WR that TB would likely try to draft at #7 to replace, with Evans. I would have liked to have had Evans, but MW is still a skilled WR who would likely deliver similar results in this next season. Since TB now drafts Evans (hypothetically, of course), the #2 tackle prospect who some had projected them to take could definitely slip to us. So we upgrade our WR corps and force a better player to fall to us, all for the price of a 6th round pick! Or TB now takes Evans instead of Mack, whom they are roumored to love. Either way, it's good for the Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 Does this make sense to anyone: Adding talent to a roster is always a good thing. Taking away talent is always a bad thing. Keeping both is always better. If you can do the first without having to do the second then that is what is best. Keep SJ13, cut from the bottom up. Shape your roster with the best talent you can. This is nothing but upside and I can't believe people don't see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Hammersticks Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 Or TB now takes Evans instead of Mack, whom they are roumored to love. Either way, it's good for the Bills. No way Mack makes it past Cleveland and Atlanta, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 No way Mack makes it past Cleveland and Atlanta, IMO. All depends on the QBs. If three QBs go in the top 5, Mack will drop, maybe all the way to 9. Sounds unlikely, but it's possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Hammersticks Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 All depends on the QBs. If three QBs go in the top 5, Mack will drop, maybe all the way to 9. Sounds unlikely, but it's possible. Sounds very unlikely. But I agree that where the QB's are taken will greatly impact the quality of players that fall to 9. With Clowney, Mack, Watkins, and Robinson/Matthews...I highly doubt 3 QB's go in the top 5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 Or TB now takes Evans instead of Mack, whom they are roumored to love. Either way, it's good for the Bills. ^^^^^ This--it also keeps us flexible to draft BPA overall, which is also a great thing. I personally really like this offseason's moves. Whaley really seems to get it. IMHO, if we upgrade via the draft at 2-3 of S, RT, LB and Abigail receiving threat (either TE or WR), with a RB taken in the mid to late rounds, we've had a great offseason.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 Oh yeah? My apologies for misrepresenting your intentions. I am probably overly sensitive to "misrepresentation" since people like to twist words around here. No worries at all. We probably could use a sarcasm font. It's hard to tell when folks are being serious or kidding. This is about as low risk as you can get. But Williams has some issues. But if you can't get your head on straight with your million dollar job on the line in your hometown, you are a complete failure. Hopefully he does because he's a talented dude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 Does this make sense to anyone: Adding talent to a roster is always a good thing. Taking away talent is always a bad thing. Keeping both is always better. If you can do the first without having to do the second then that is what is best. Keep SJ13, cut from the bottom up. Shape your roster with the best talent you can. This is nothing but upside and I can't believe people don't see it. It's because you're thinking logically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Hammersticks Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 ^^^^^ This--it also keeps us flexible to draft BPA overall, which is also a great thing. I personally really like this offseason's moves. Whaley really seems to get it. IMHO, if we upgrade via the draft at 2-3 of S, RT, LB and Abigail receiving threat (either TE or WR), with a RB taken in the mid to late rounds, we've had a great offseason.... Who's this Abigail receiving threat you speak of? From the lingerie league? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 This may need its own thread, and perhaps it's being discussed elsewhere, but me wonders with this trade if because of the unfortunate events of the last couple weeks, and a report that the team may be sold sooner than later, if, Brandon, Whaley, Marrone are suddenly in more of a win-now mode, and willing to do a few things that they may not normally do if they were in more of a build for the lasting future mode. This would be a good sign of it, and it may not be a bad thing. So if this is more of a we want as much talent on the team as possible, and we aren't gonna worry about paying two pretty good WRs 6-7m each, we want a dynamic offense, then I am all for this new 'tude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DefenseWinzChampionshipz Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 Xavier Omon just threw his mop clear to the other side of the store. Chris white tweeted to @ChrisWhite and replied to himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 Or TB now takes Evans instead of Mack, whom they are roumored to love. Either way, it's good for the Bills. It would be hard for a defensive coach like Lovie to pass on Mack. But seeing how McCown performed with 2 big Wrs last year, Evans across from VJax is very interesting. I think Evans is going to be a star. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 I hope Tampa drafts Evans. And that at least 3, and hopefully 4 QBs drafted before our pick. Watkins-Robinson-Clowney-Mack-Mathews- one will be at our pick if that scenerio plays out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 I hope Tampa drafts Evans. And that at least 3, and hopefully 4 QBs drafted before our pick. Watkins-Robinson-Clowney-Mack-Mathews- one will be at our pick if that scenerio plays out I usually don't rule out any possibility...but this one...it just isn't possible IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Barbarian Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 Troubled home town kid. Gave up sixth rounder Seems like he has had troubles all the way through college till now, hopefully he can get it together. However I don't see why we traded for a troubled WR who is average size when we have a bunch of guys like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maury Ballstein Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 There`s been a lot more than the DUI. I was waiting for your mouth to surface. Tell us about it. Which transgression was the worst ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 I usually don't rule out any possibility...but this one...it just isn't possible IMO Four seems highly unlikely, but all of the top eight teams other than Atlanta have fairly high need for a QB. I would say four or five of them are or should be desperate for one. Every year, QBs get overdrafted (ponder, tannehill, locker, gabbert, etc). Why should this year be different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dollars 2 donuts Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 It's because you're thinking logically. I know, right. Man, Nuch, it is amazing how some of us think as fans. "We just got someone good, so by all means let's get rid of someone good and while we're at let's not go after someone who may be even better." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 Four seems highly unlikely, but all of the top eight teams other than Atlanta have fairly high need for a QB. I would say four or five of them are or should be desperate for one. Every year, QBs get overdrafted (ponder, tannehill, locker, gabbert, etc). Why should this year be different? I don't see more than 2 in the top 8. I thought 3 for a while but leading up to the draft hype on Bortles has cooled some and on Bridgewater quite a bit. At the same time the position players have solidified their places in the top 10. To answer your question, the strength of the top non QBs (Watkins, Evans, Clowney, Robinson, Mack, and Matthews) have QB needy teams trying to grab 1 of them and then go for a Mettenberger type. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts