Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 hours ago, Canadian Bills Fan said:

Just the thought of having Mack and Edmunds lining up at LB for us makes me go from 6 to 12

 

Centimeters?

Posted (edited)

I used to immediately discredit just about anything I read coming from LaCanfora, especially if it was about the Bills. However, he had the Rex firing news weeks before it went down and also had the Whaley firing news around that same time. Since then he's also hit on a few other Bills news-bits before anyone else had. He's clearly got someone in the know with the Bills that tips him off so, while this rumor isn't exactly earth-shattering because it's been floating around for a while now that Mack might end up on the trade block, it's interesting to see an "official" source name the Bills as an interested party. I gotta imagine the asking price is astronomical at this point, plus whichever team lands him is going to have to keep him happy by sending a fleet of loaded Brinks trucks to his house and unloading a few bazillion dollars onto his lawn.

Edited by blacklabel
Posted

If Peterman is a piece that turns into Mack, he will be the greatest Bills QB since Kelly in terms of what he brought to the Bills. 

2 minutes ago, turftoe said:

I think Gruden would have his eye set on Peterman.  Throw in Lawson and a 1st rounder and a deal could be done.  Mack can rush from either side of the line.

 

Gruden loves Peterman

 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
17 minutes ago, mannc said:

Except that he’s really not; he’s on the fifth year option, which is not a bargain.  And he’s said he won’t play under it.

Yeah, Mack is on the fifth year option but Allen isn't making much money right now. The fact that Mack is on the 5th year option doesn't really mean anything. Since Allen is on his rookie deal, it wouldn't matter if we're paying Mack a lot this season or any of the next 3 seasons after this because Allen is gonna be making next to nothing for the first 4 years of his contract and we have a boatload of cap space starting next season

Posted
5 minutes ago, turftoe said:

I think Gruden would have his eye set on Peterman.  Throw in Lawson and a 1st rounder and a deal could be done.  Mack can rush from either side of the line.

 

Gruden loves Peterman

 

Considering that Connor Cook and EJ aren't exactly tearing it up ,    Peterman may be an attractive insurance option for Gruden.  

Posted
Just now, Buffalo03 said:

Yeah, Mack is on the fifth year option but Allen isn't making much money right now. The fact that Mack is on the 5th year option doesn't really mean anything. Since Allen is on his rookie deal, it wouldn't matter if we're paying Mack a lot this season or any of the next 3 seasons after this because Allen is gonna be making next to nothing for the first 4 years of his contract and we have a boatload of cap space starting next season

I don’t disagree, but the point is, Mack is not playing on a bargain rookie contract anymore.

Posted
4 minutes ago, turftoe said:

I think Gruden would have his eye set on Peterman.  Throw in Lawson and a 1st rounder and a deal could be done.  Mack can rush from either side of the line.

 

Gruden loves Peterman

 

This would be a hundred shades of amazing if it could be done.  And it might even be possible.  Buffalo might be holding off waiting to see how Allen does Sunday before pulling the trigger on such a deal.

 

...oh, I can hope, can't I?

Posted
2 minutes ago, mannc said:

I don’t disagree, but the point is, Mack is not playing on a bargain rookie contract anymore.

Well yeah, everyone knows that. Basically, he would be making Josh Allen QB money until Josh Allen himself makes QB money so really it evens out. You can have the best defensive player in the league for at least the next 4 or 5 seasons and then if Allen pans out and we have to pay him then you decide what to do with Mack at that point

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Buffalo03 said:

Bottom line, this is all Doug Whaley's fault. He could be on our team already

 

Put another way, if they trade a 1st rounder for Mack, that would make what, 3 first round picks they've effectively given up for Watkins?

Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, ThunderGun said:

Hughes or Lawson and a first?  Then if Murphy ever gets healthy, this defense will just be a Biscuit away.

You would almost have to include Hughes's big contract so you can pay the guy,  then offer next year 2nd and following season 2nd & 3rd.  Why do we have to give up a first?  what did we get for Sammy ?  Trades are rare in the NFL and unless you are trading for QB you never want to give up a first

 

Sorry but at 27 he may only have 3 good seasons left,  so (2) 2nd round picks and a 3rd but no first

Edited by Niagara Dude
Posted
3 minutes ago, Niagara Dude said:

You would almost have to include Hughes's big contract so you can pay the guy,  then offer next year 2nd and following season 2nd & 3rd.  Why do we have to give up a first?  what did we get for Sammy ?  Trades are rare in the NFL and unless you are trading for QB you never want to give up a first

 

Sorry but at 27 he may only have 3 good seasons left,  so (2) 2nd round picks and a 3rd but no first

He's not a RB. Elite DE's don't usually run out of gas at 30.

Posted

I think we are undervaluing the talent of Mack somewhat. The first player ever to be named All Pro at two different positions? And he's just in his prime as a player? He's a rare, transcendent player; the guy an offense has to account for before EVERY snap. We don't have anyone like that on our defense. As such, I think the minimum price will be what we paid for Biscuit back in the day and, imo, he's worth it seven ways to Sunday. Polian's formula still stands today; if you think you have your QB, then you get a player who can get to the opponent's QB. 

  • Like (+1) 4
×
×
  • Create New...