MadBuffaloDisease Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 According to Billsdaily.com, the Titans are willing to give a conditional 3rd for Travis. But the Bills want a straight-up 3rd, and the Jags are still considered the favorite. I say this is good news, and holdout for more. It's not like Taylor and Brown will be healthy and/or able to magically shake injury problems, and more RB's will likely go down. http://billsdaily.com/news/index.shtml#070205 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frez Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 Willis is God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted July 2, 2005 Author Share Posted July 2, 2005 I guess there's nothing more to say on this. Thread closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frez Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 I guess there's nothing more to say on this. Thread closed. 373784[/snapback] ha-ha-ha-ha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 Depending on what happens if the "conditions" are not met, I would rather get a 4th than a conditional 3rd. Once the poor team that we sucker into taking this idiot sees just how useless he is, they will sit him on the bench. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Live&DieBillsFootball Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 I have no doubt that we will get a 3rd in the next month. Also, I would rather send him to Tenn than the jags. The Jags are closer to a playoff team and TH might still have a lot left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob in SC Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 Now, wait a minute! We could speculate on why TD refuses to budge on his demands for TH. On second thought, naaaah! I'm too old to take the abuse I would receive. Besides, we only deal in FACTS here! No place for speculation on TSW! Right? 373802[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted July 3, 2005 Author Share Posted July 3, 2005 Depending on what happens if the "conditions" are not met, I would rather get a 4th than a conditional 3rd. Once the poor team that we sucker into taking this idiot sees just how useless he is, they will sit him on the bench. Thread re-opened. I'd rather get a 3rd and a conditional 2nd, or more. No deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 Thread re-opened. I'd rather get a 3rd and a conditional 2nd, or more. No deal. 373806[/snapback] A 3rd AND a conditional second? You have a better chance of being elected president. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted July 3, 2005 Author Share Posted July 3, 2005 A 3rd AND a conditional second?You have a better chance of being elected president. Just wait. And it will be mister president Disease to you, buddy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 Just wait.And it's MISTER Disease to you, buddy! 373811[/snapback] Yes Sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob in SC Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 Thread re-opened. I'd rather get a 3rd and a conditional 2nd, or more. No deal. 373806[/snapback] Have to agree. This is not some journeyman loser of a RB here. He's a starter on most teams. And, I still think he would be a very cheap insurance policy for 2005 if Willis stumbles, for whatever reason. Get value or keep him! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 Have to agree. This is not some journeyman loser of a RB here. He's a starter on most teams. And, I still think he would be a very cheap insurance policy for 2005 if Willis stumbles, for whatever reason. Get value or keep him! 373814[/snapback] Do you think that the Bill's record in games in which TH was the starting RB is indicative of TH being a winner? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob in SC Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 Do you think that the Bill's record in games in which TH was the starting RB is indicative of TH being a winner? 373819[/snapback] This was not a world class line that he was attempting to run behind. Give him a break! He is an above average NFL running back and worth more than a "shot in the dark" fourth or fifth round draft choce. Personally, I like the guy. He gave his all, and I appreciate that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 This was not a world class line that he was attempting to run behind. Give him a break! He is an above average NFL running back and worth more than a "shot in the dark" fourth or fifth round draft choce. Personally, I like the guy. He gave his all, and I appreciate that. 373832[/snapback] I understand what you are saying, but Willis WAS able to run behind that same OL. As soon as Travis was benched, sacks were also cut in less than half, and the Bills were able to defeat other football teams. It is OK to disregard these facts, but they exist nonetheless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Typical TBD Guy Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 A 3rd AND a conditional second? You have a better chance of being elected president. 373810[/snapback] If more RB's go down to injury this August, we may very well see a trade package like that. I know you think Travis Henry is the worst RB in the history of the NFL, but most reasonable Bills fans still remember his toughness and high productivity in 2002 and 2003. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fake-Fat Sunny Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 I understand what you are saying, but Willis WAS able to run behind that same OL. As soon as Travis was benched, sacks were also cut in less than half, and the Bills were able to defeat other football teams. It is OK to disregard these facts, but they exist nonetheless. 373847[/snapback] One should not disregard the Bills record with TH stsrting since this would be just as foolish as disregarding: 1. That this is a team game and it is not a good football judgment to attribute any specific series of wins or losses to one player's replacement with another player. 2. That the sack improvement record of the Bills certainly was helped a lot by a better outside running threat which WM provided that Henry did not, however the better Bills sack performance strikes me as being influenced at least and actually much more caused by: A. Better blocking teaching by JMac particularly getting a better performance out of Williams who got off to a slow start at best as he lost weight put on in pre-season, Villarial improved in his play as he got more and more time in the Bills system, the Bills made a major shift over the course of the season at RG first moving to Bannan and Adams in the redzone and shifting to Ross Tucker starting. B. Establishment of a tendency toward flea-flickers which casued LBs and DBs to wait and watch before commitng to the blitz and even being willing to run the slow-footed Bledsoe on the QB draw which forced the D to not commit solely to the rush. C. Getting on a roll with the ST and D which provided not only better field position but bif leagues which forced the opposing D to be far more conservative in their play. The notion that the reactive defending against mistakes action of better n;iyz pick-up is more important to sack total than any of these three factors (or even anywhere near the greater contribution of WM to the blitz numbers of providing an outside running threat makes little football sense to me. 3. that TH's performance in the first four games last year for the Bills and his trade value to a team which thinks he can perform better for them because both he and the Bills appeared to give up on each other when it became clear last year that the team was going to use WM as soon as the could as their feature back. I agree TH sucked for the Bills last year, but this is not the same as whether some team will trade a lot for him. 4. it is particularly foolish to disregard TH's well-rspected by many in the league 2002 and 2003 performances where he rushed for over 1300 yards because he went into a pout and put up inadequate numbers in the first four games last year. It would be silly to disregard his career as it would be silly to disregard last year. 5, the fact that trade value is determined not simply by one's assessment of a player but also by how that assessment compares to what you have and what you will have to give to get him. Both the Jags and the Titans have players who have been (Taylor) or might be (Brown) more productive players than Henry, but both have had a clear history of injuries far more serious to their games than Henry. In addition, Henry is a former Pro Bowler under contract next year cheaply and even the RBs who might be pried from their current teams (Alexander and James) will be far more expensive next year. Definitely Henry's 04 should not be disregarded, but which of the above 5 points are your disregarding by claiming he has no trade value? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 If more RB's go down to injury this August, we may very well see a trade package like that. I know you think Travis Henry is the worst RB in the history of the NFL, but most reasonable Bills fans still remember his toughness and high productivity in 2002 and 2003. 373895[/snapback] Most "reasonable' Bills fans can think as they will, but there were 31 perhaps unreasonable GMs who refused to cough up a first day pick in a notably weak draft. Obviousy, the consensus was that he was not worth it. On this thread, we have already gone from a conditional 3rd to a 2nd AND a conditional 3rd. At this rate, the return of the "Gallery for Henry" and/or "2nd Pick in the draft for Henry" posts is near. Remember those "reasonable" posts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted July 3, 2005 Author Share Posted July 3, 2005 Most "reasonable' Bills fans can think as they will, but there were 31 perhaps unreasonable GMs who refused to cough up a first day pick in a notably weak draft. Obviousy, the consensus was that he was not worth it. Yet now he is. Go figure! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 Yet now he is. Go figure! 373930[/snapback] Sorry, I must have missed the part about this being more than a rumor and a deal being completed. Either way, I hope that you are right, and not holding your breath, Mr. President. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts