Jump to content

Which Travis deal would you like to see happen?  

73 members have voted

  1. 1. Which Travis deal would you like to see happen?

    • To Oakland for Charles Woodson
      1
    • To Oakland for Jake Grove
      18
    • To Cleveland for Gerard Warren
      3
    • To Philly for a 2nd round pick
      13
    • To Arizona for LJ Shelton
      29
    • To Cleveland for Jeff Faine
      9


Recommended Posts

Posted

All are rumors are have read on other boards. My least favorite is Charles Woodson. I'd like either Warren or Grove.

Posted
There's no way they would deal Henry for Charloes Woodson ------- Woodson is scheduled to make 10 million dollars this year and there's no way Buffalo would pay that

255297[/snapback]

 

obviously whatever team deals for woodson will lock him into a long-term deal........10M is too big a cap charge for any team........

 

p.s. i don't think he's coming to buffalo

Posted

While I would probably be happy with a stick of used chewing gum for Travis, other then Warren I would be happy with any of those guys. Shelton probably fills the biggest need however.

Posted

I would take the Grove deal first and if that couldn't happen the Shelton deal would be fine with me. We need a replacement for JJ and Grove is the younger of the two, but I'd be fine with either of them.

Posted
While I would probably be happy with a stick of used chewing gum for Travis, other then Warren I would be happy with any of those guys.  Shelton probably fills the biggest need however.

255330[/snapback]

 

VA, it is obvious that you and I value TH far less than the party line, but i have one for you.....

 

Do you think that the Eagles would take our 2nd round pick & Henry for their 1st round pick? I have my doubts if the Eagles would make the trade, but I would gladly do so.

Posted
VA, it is obvious that you and I value TH far less than the party line, but i have one for you.....

 

Do you think that the Eagles would take our 2nd round pick & Henry for their 1st round pick? I have my doubts if the Eagles would make the trade, but I would gladly do so.

255409[/snapback]

That moves us up about 20 spots to the end of the first. IMHO it's probably about right value, but I don't see Philly wanting him. He would be the backup, they would be better served using their own second and picking up a back. As for the Bills not sure what they gives us, it would depend on who is available. I just don't see us being helped much at all by that trade, other than clearing Travis from the locker room. We however wind up taking on more cap burden with a 1st rounder.

Posted
That moves us up about 20 spots to the end of the first.  IMHO it's probably about right value, but I don't see Philly wanting him.  He would be the backup, they would be better served using their own second and picking up a back.  As for the Bills not sure what they gives us, it would depend on who is available.  I just don't see us being helped much at all by that trade, other than clearing Travis from the locker room.  We however wind up taking on more cap burden with a 1st rounder.

255414[/snapback]

 

True, the Eagles might not be the spot.

What the Bills WOULD get in terms of this kind of a deal is a much better chance at a cornerback, if this is where they are going.

I have a feeling they will go very fast, and the jests are almost certain to select one with their first pick.

The OGs went faster than expected last season as well if I recall.

Posted

Part of the hangup with Arizona and Travis maybe he wants a guarentee to start. With Shipp there Travis may have to earn his way on the field. Shipp has shown flashes and when healthy is a quality running back. Is he better then Travis, running skill wise NO. He is a better all around make, Maybe.

Posted
True, the Eagles might not be the spot.

What the Bills WOULD get in terms of this kind of a deal is a much better chance at a cornerback, if this is where they are going.

I have a feeling they will go very fast, and the jests are almost certain to select one with their first pick.

The OGs went faster than expected last season as well if I recall.

255421[/snapback]

 

I think that the Bills are going to take a CB with our first pick no matter where we are in the draft. This year is by far one of the better years to get a CB, much like last year's draft was deep at WR.

 

CBs available in draft

 

9 CBs are projected to be drafted in the first two rounds.

 

Based on TD's draft history, if he selects a CB with the first pick, you can expect Nate Clements to be either tagged next year and traded (Peerless), or the Bills will let him walk in FA (Antoine WInfield).

Posted
I think that the Bills are going to take a CB with our first pick no matter where we are in the draft.  This year is by far one of the better years to get a CB, much like last year's draft was deep at WR. 

 

CBs available in draft

 

9 CBs are projected to be drafted in the first two rounds. 

 

Based on TD's draft history, if he selects a CB with the first pick, you can expect Nate Clements to be either tagged next year and traded (Peerless), or the Bills will let him walk in FA (Antoine WInfield).

255461[/snapback]

 

i think we need a CB even if nate signs an extension before the draft.......mcgee needs some pressure on him and thomas certainly looks like he could be replaced in the nickel spot.........very expensive to sign free agent CB's so i think the draft is the best route to address the weakness.........

Posted
I think that the Bills are going to take a CB with our first pick no matter where we are in the draft.  This year is by far one of the better years to get a CB, much like last year's draft was deep at WR. 

 

CBs available in draft

 

9 CBs are projected to be drafted in the first two rounds. 

 

Based on TD's draft history, if he selects a CB with the first pick, you can expect Nate Clements to be either tagged next year and traded (Peerless), or the Bills will let him walk in FA (Antoine WInfield).

255461[/snapback]

 

In 05, the franchise tag costs more for a cb (woodson 10.15 million) than a LT (Pace approx. 8 million).

Imo, the tag is no longer an option wrt Nate at that price.

Posted
In 05, the franchise tag costs more for a cb (woodson 10.15 million) than a LT (Pace approx. 8 million).

Imo, the tag is no longer an option wrt Nate at that price.

255473[/snapback]

 

woodson's number is so high because a f-tagged player receives either the average of the top 5 at the position OR 120% of your previous year's salary........because he was tagged last year (which is considered all salary), he gets the 120%.......

 

the tag number this year for CB's is 8.816M.........

Posted

Didn't know this:

 

Browns | Green Allowed to Seek Trade - from www.KFFL.com

Fri, 25 Feb 2005 19:20:12 -0800

 

The Associated Press reports that the Cleveland Browns have given RB William Green permission to seek a trade.

 

Posted
Didn't know this:

255628[/snapback]

Hell let's swap cancers with Cleveland. Travis thinks it's bad here, wait until he is behind Suggs in Cleveland. Who has no line, no defense, no QB, and no receivers.

Posted

I wouldn't mind getting Faine...a lot of the Cleveland fans that I know love this guy. It is no secret that our OL could use improvement.

Posted
woodson's number is so high because a f-tagged player receives either the average of the top 5 at the position OR 120% of your previous year's salary........because he was tagged last year (which is considered all salary), he gets the 120%.......

 

the tag number this year for CB's is 8.816M.........

255480[/snapback]

 

Thanks for the info. That is still a sick number, no?

×
×
  • Create New...