thisiskeith12 Posted December 12, 2005 Posted December 12, 2005 Receivers missing Moulds As Evans said of Moulds, "He makes it easier on all of us." "Just his presence on the field, defenses have to respect that," Reed added. "Not having Eric on the field was probably a burden off (the Patriots) because they didn't have to worry about making changes in their coverages to account for him." Moulds is scheduled to make his return this week. It sounds like his fellow wideouts are looking forward to having him back. "Eric's a great player and we need him," Reed said. "We're definitely a better team with him than without him."
Bill from NYC Posted December 12, 2005 Posted December 12, 2005 Receivers missing Moulds As Evans said of Moulds, "He makes it easier on all of us." "Just his presence on the field, defenses have to respect that," Reed added. "Not having Eric on the field was probably a burden off (the Patriots) because they didn't have to worry about making changes in their coverages to account for him." Moulds is scheduled to make his return this week. It sounds like his fellow wideouts are looking forward to having him back. "Eric's a great player and we need him," Reed said. "We're definitely a better team with him than without him." 529614[/snapback] Moulds and his 9.5 yards per catch would have made all the difference in the world yesterday. I am glad that he disrupted the team. It served to show us exactly how much we do miss him. Even though his cap figure is said to be 10.8 million next year, I think he should be given a raise, and kept on the roster until he is at least 50.
JAMIEBUF12 Posted December 12, 2005 Posted December 12, 2005 you must be on drugs!eric will not be worth 11 million dollars ayear.he is not worth that at his peak a few years ago when he was good!i wouldn't pay any wr 11 mil and that includes t.o. randy moss and even marvin harrison.
ASCI Posted December 12, 2005 Posted December 12, 2005 Receivers missing Moulds As Evans said of Moulds, "He makes it easier on all of us." "Just his presence on the field, defenses have to respect that," Reed added. "Not having Eric on the field was probably a burden off (the Patriots) because they didn't have to worry about making changes in their coverages to account for him." "Eric's a great player and we need him," Reed said. "We're definitely a better team with him than without him." 529614[/snapback] This is pure BS our WR must not have a brain cell amoung them! A good OL That could keep rushers out of JP’s face will help the WR’s a lot more then moulds could ever do. Good OL’s freeze time, more time to run the routes and more time to make good decisions.
KOKBILLS Posted December 12, 2005 Posted December 12, 2005 you must be on drugs!eric will not be worth 11 million dollars ayear.he is not worth that at his peak a few years ago when he was good!i wouldn't pay any wr 11 mil and that includes t.o. randy moss and even marvin harrison. 529676[/snapback] Why when you disagree must you insult someone personally? And why is being on drugs assumed to be a bad thing...
JDG Posted December 12, 2005 Posted December 12, 2005 This is pure BS our WR must not have a brain cell amoung them!A good OL That could keep rushers out of JP’s face will help the WR’s a lot more then moulds could ever do. Good OL’s freeze time, more time to run the routes and more time to make good decisions. 529746[/snapback] Having a guy drawing double-coverages can't hurt either....
thisiskeith12 Posted December 12, 2005 Author Posted December 12, 2005 http://nfl.com/gamecenter/live/NFL_20051030_BUF@NE
JAMIEBUF12 Posted December 12, 2005 Posted December 12, 2005 Why when you disagree must you insult someone personally? And why is being on drugs assumed to be a bad thing... 529765[/snapback] drugs r baaaaad nkay! didnt mean to insult you personally just thought that erics outrageous contract is not worth it sorry go bills in'06
Ray Posted December 13, 2005 Posted December 13, 2005 Keith is 100% right! For those saying we don't need Moulds take a look how are offense did against the 31st ranked pass defense. That's right there is only one other defense worse against the pass than the Pats and our Moulds-less receiving corps surely looked great. For those pointing to his 9.5 yards per catch, you're missing so much else. He gets double teamed and when he doesn't (look at the 1st Pats game for a comparison) he makes the defense pay. He makes Evens better and every other receiver out there better. It's no coincidence that the worst offensive performance of the year was without him in the lineup. He is not the receiver he once was but he is still a VERY valuable weapon on this team. How did Peerless Price's career go after he no longer had Moulds?
Ramius Posted December 13, 2005 Posted December 13, 2005 Keith is 100% right! For those saying we don't need Moulds take a look how are offense did against the 31st ranked pass defense. That's right there is only one other defense worse against the pass than the Pats and our Moulds-less receiving corps surely looked great. For those pointing to his 9.5 yards per catch, you're missing so much else. He gets double teamed and when he doesn't (look at the 1st Pats game for a comparison) he makes the defense pay. He makes Evens better and every other receiver out there better. It's no coincidence that the worst offensive performance of the year was without him in the lineup. He is not the receiver he once was but he is still a VERY valuable weapon on this team. How did Peerless Price's career go after he no longer had Moulds? 530314[/snapback] yes, because having moulds on the field would have somehow given JP more than 0.26 seconds of time to throw it to him...
thisiskeith12 Posted December 13, 2005 Author Posted December 13, 2005 McGahee actually showed up during the 1st Pats game this year. That helped take the defense's focus off of Moulds in which it allowed him to make more plays. But that is irrelevant. I think the only chance of Moulds staying is if a really impressive coach comes in. In that case, I can see him taking a significant contract bite. After all, he could take the contract bite, play his guts out next year with his last year on his contract, and rally for a better contract, whether in Buffalo or not.
sfladave Posted December 13, 2005 Posted December 13, 2005 McGahee actually showed up during the 1st Pats game this year. That helped take the defense's focus off of Moulds in which it allowed him to make more plays. But that is irrelevant. I think the only chance of Moulds staying is if a really impressive coach comes in. In that case, I can see him taking a significant contract bite. After all, he could take the contract bite, play his guts out next year with his last year on his contract, and rally for a better contract, whether in Buffalo or not. 530333[/snapback] With the current CBA a player cannot take a meaningful contract cut. Moulds might be allowed to take a 10% cut or so, otherwise we would have to extend his contract again or release then try to resign him.
Recommended Posts