Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
7 minutes ago, MrEpsYtown said:

 

This is a good point. They may still have a really positive relationship as Bettcher left before Hughes was traded. But the fact is that he Hughes wasn't great for Indy. His best year for them was 2012, which was the only season James Bettcher was his coach. So it could be something, or it could be nothing. 

I believe Jerry Hughes was on the team for a full year with Bettcher as has LB coach. I think there's a better chance they'd want Lawson. Lawson played the same role in college they have with Chandler Jones or with some of the other 34 sams they had there. Lawson could play right outside and move down to six technique which Hughes never could because of his size. Just look at the list they had there in Arizona, John Abraham, Lamarr Woodley, Alex Okafor, and Chandler Jones.

Posted
37 minutes ago, CuddyDark said:

He failed at 3-4 OLB when the Giants DC was his LB coach.

 

He didn't really fail. He played less than half the snaps there, started 7 games in 3 years and got a lot of ST play. Hughes had 5 sacks in 7 starts there, and I'm pretty sure they regret trading him away.

Posted
39 minutes ago, dbflaBill said:

What? Hughs is more a 3-4 rush LB than he is a 4-3 D end. 

No, he is best suited as a DE in the 43. At least that is how his carrier has played out. Don't let a Defense scheme get in the way. Just get a player and they can play wherever. This is what i was told today anyways!  :rolleyes:

Posted
Just now, fridge said:

 

He didn't really fail. He played less than half the snaps there, started 7 games in 3 years and got a lot of ST play. Hughes had 5 sacks in 7 starts there, and I'm pretty sure they regret trading him away.

Then why did they trade him? Easy he was drafted to play 43 RDE. When they went to a 3-4 they didn't like him as a fit, so they traded him.

Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Green Lightning said:

I think trading JPP for picks means they are staying put at #2.

They only got a 3rd for him, and swapped 4th rd picks.. They only gained 1 pick with the trade. Now they have a whopping 6 picks. I don't believe this changes what they do with their 2nd overall pick

Edited by Bills4life1924
Posted
1 minute ago, Bills4life1924 said:

They only got a 3rd for him, and swapped 4th rd picks.. They only gained 1 pick with the trade. Now they have a whopping 6 picks. I don't believe this changes what they do with their 2nd overall pick

 

Hope so B4L. Certainly adds to the drama and it's going to continue for FN weeks more!

Posted
6 minutes ago, CuddyDark said:

Then why did they trade him? Easy he was drafted to play 43 RDE. When they went to a 3-4 they didn't like him as a fit, so they traded him.

 

No, it's not "easy". Jerry would thrive as a blitzing LB in a 3-4.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
22 minutes ago, LedyardCTbillsfan said:

It is more likely to be Lawson IMO

Yes. Lawson is a good fit in a 3-4. Not a particularly good fit in our 4-3.

The minute I heard about JPP, I thought we are packaging Lawson in a deal with the Giants.

It fits.

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted
1 minute ago, Green Lightning said:

 

Hope so B4L. Certainly adds to the drama and it's going to continue for FN weeks more!

Got that right. I actually like all the speculation, but would love to hear the bills are trading up sooner rather than later (unfortunately ur prob right and is gonna be weeks to hear anything)

2 minutes ago, Wagon Circler said:

Yes. Lawson is a good fit in a 3-4. Not a particularly good fit in our 4-3.

The minute I heard about JPP, I thought we are packaging Lawson in a deal with the Giants.

It fits.

Not to mention, giants could afford shaq, Hughes would be pushing their budget

Posted
Just now, Bills4life1924 said:

Got that right. I actually like all the speculation, but would love to hear the bills are trading up sooner rather than later (unfortunately ur prob right and is gonna be weeks to hear anything)

 

I think Beane is going to play this close to the vest and not make a call until the draft begins. So those who enjoy the speculation will have plenty more and those who burn stomach lining over this are in for a long few weeks!  I go back and forth!

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
22 minutes ago, fridge said:

 

He didn't really fail. He played less than half the snaps there, started 7 games in 3 years and got a lot of ST play. Hughes had 5 sacks in 7 starts there, and I'm pretty sure they regret trading him away.

Stats aside Hughes played great last year.  He was our best DL.

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, fridge said:

 

No, it's not "easy". Jerry would thrive as a blitzing LB in a 3-4.

But that's not their scheme. We're talking about the Giants. Their DC uses a Sam/RDE who can both blitz and play 6,5, and 4 technique. That is not Jerry Hughes. It so much not Jerry Hughes that when he was being coached for that system with the same coach he was traded because he didn't fit.

Edited by CuddyDark
Posted
5 minutes ago, CuddyDark said:

But that's not their scheme. We're talking about the Giants. Their DC uses a Sam/RDE who can both blitz and play 6,5, and 4 technique. That is not Jerry Hughes. It so much not Jerry Hughes that when he was being coached for that system with the same coach he was traded because he didn't fit.

 

Except he did fit, they were horribly run, impatient, and overvalued Kelvin Sheppard.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, fridge said:

 

Except he did fit, they were horribly run, impatient, and overvalued Kelvin Sheppard.

Or he didn't fit, they thought he was a bust and they traded him.

Edited by CuddyDark
×
×
  • Create New...