Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 576
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

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.
Posted

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.

Posted

 

 

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.
Posted

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.

Posted

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....

Posted

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.

Posted

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.

Posted

 

 

^^^^^ 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?

Posted

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.

Posted

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.

Posted

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

Posted

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

Posted

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.

Posted

 

 

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?
Posted

 

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."

 

 

 

Posted

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.
×
×
  • Create New...