Virgil Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 Is Robert woods hurt or something? I don't see WR as a need at all
bills_fan_in_raleigh Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 Is Robert woods hurt or something? I don't see WR as a need at all agree. We are fine at WR we need TE and OG
YoloinOhio Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 Where do you see that? I've only seen need to for big redzone target discussed. Could be TE (Clay)
K D Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 I think we need a big physical receiver but that could come in the form of an athletic tight end
Not at the table Karlos Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 Haven't heard any talk about needing a no. 2. Woods is fine. Like others have said an athletic TE would be nice
YoloinOhio Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 No worries about woods. Everything I've ever read or heard is that the Bills love him. He's a stud.
Virgil Posted March 9, 2015 Author Posted March 9, 2015 Just comments scattered throughout other threads. Just found it odd
BobChalmers Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 Just comments scattered throughout other threads. Just found it odd There is a lot of nonsense on this board.
GunnerBill Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 I wouldn't mind us adding an older eceiver at a reasonable price on a 1 year deal or a 2 year deal where it costs us almost nothing to cut him after 1 year.... someone who is still hanging around after the first batch of FA signings probably. However, our number 1 and number 2 WR positions are set.
Chuck Wagon Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 I think Crabtree should be a top target. If healthy he dramatically improves our 3 WR sets.
YoloinOhio Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 I think Crabtree should be a top target. If healthy he dramatically improves our 3 WR sets.The issue with trying to sign a FA WR like him is I think you would need to overpay to try to attract him to play somewhere without a QB. I think he would prioritize going somewhere with a really good QB/passing game if he has the option.
respk Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 A big receiver is certainly a need. The receiver corps is relatively small. Only one receiver over 6-2. It would be nice to have a big receiver 6-4 or 6-5 to run with Watkins and Woods.
YoloinOhio Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 A big receiver is certainly a need. The receiver corps is relatively small. Only one receiver over 6-2. It would be nice to have a big receiver 6-4 or 6-5 to run with Watkins and Woods.i could see them taking a run at a guy like Kenny Britt from the Rams if he doesn't re-sign there. Bills were really interested in him last year.
GG Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 Is Robert woods hurt or something? He's just not physical enough to be an NFL caliber WR.
YoloinOhio Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 He's just not physical enough to be an NFL caliber WR. I see what you did there. Classic thread.
GG Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 I see what you did there. Classic thread. Idiocy can't be reinforced enough.
BigBuff423 Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 I see a larger outside WR as an issue, but not necessarily a "need" i.e. Offensive line, TE, etc. But, I like Robert Woods, a lot, but see him more as a slot WR, and guy like Crabtree as a larger outside WR target...Hogan is good, but more in a 4 WR set, IMHO....so, Drafting a bigger, possession type WR is also a good choice to me...no need to spend FA money if it gets tied up in Offensive line, TE, and maybe LB / CB depth....
NoSaint Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 the only thing ive seen is people discussing needing a 3rd target - could be a WR or a TE but when chandler and hogan are fighting for targets at #3 for your offense, you can stand to upgrade one of them.
YoloinOhio Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 I think if they can get Clay, they will go with current WR group.
Recommended Posts