BillsBabe Posted December 26, 2005 Author Posted December 26, 2005 SDS you prove my point, how can you say you want him back because he is the reason the teams drafted well and then when things don't go your way, you say he wasn't responsible for the drafts. Which one is it? 542452[/snapback] Curdog (oops -- Scurdog) -- I'm fairly certain the point is that you can't base anyone's NFL career on ONE draft/season. Dwight Adams did have a lot of input in the 2001 draft, all TD had done was watch TV. It was a "decent" draft -- not the best, certainly not the worst. Scurdog -- you're digging your proverbial grave on here.
BillsBabe Posted December 26, 2005 Author Posted December 26, 2005 So if the Bills had the best draft in 2001 according to you then why was Carolina in the Super Bowl with their players and the Bills were watching them play on TV?????????? 542476[/snapback] GREAT point -- FINALLY -- Scurdog! The answer? Because TD got RID of all the WINNERS at Buffalo. DUH! But, hey -- ya FINALLY answered your OWN dilemma!
BillsBabe Posted December 26, 2005 Author Posted December 26, 2005 I agree- enough said- its not happening. Donahoe and Mularkey stay 542478[/snapback] Unfortunately, you're probably correct.
dave mcbride Posted December 26, 2005 Posted December 26, 2005 The '99 draft has Antoine and that's it. Newman is a back up and Bryson has never been anything but a backup. The rest is GARBAGE and out of the league. So try again. 542424[/snapback] are you a flat out idjit or what??? 1 23 Antoine Winfield CB Ohio St. 2 53 Peerless Price WR Tennessee 3 86 Shawn Bryson RB Tennessee 4 119 Keith Newman ILB North Carolina 4 122 Bobby Collins TE North Alabama 5 156 Jay Foreman OLB Nebraska 6 194 Armon Hatcher S Oregon St. 7 230 Sheldon Jackson TE Nebraska 7 248 Bryce Fisher DE Air Force 1 - pro bowl caliber player 2 - 4 good to great seasons for the bills; netted them a 1st rd pick; sure to be back in the league next year 3 - still in the league after 6 years and can still break a long run 4 - still starting for the vikes and had 2 excellent seasons for the bills 4- scrub 5 - starting LB in the nfl for 3 seasons 6 - scrub 7 - scrub 7 - [sure sign that you're an IDJIT!]: http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/133284
Bill from NYC Posted December 26, 2005 Posted December 26, 2005 He would. But, I doubt he'll be asked. Some people find the taste of crow to be unbearable. 542511[/snapback] Thanks! As for YOU, welcome back, and Merry Christmas! Would you please ask him to come home and bring us some blockers?
Rubes Posted December 26, 2005 Posted December 26, 2005 It's unbelievable to me that a season ticket holder since '75 has no idea who Dwight Adams was/is. But, OK -- I guess some are simply "season ticket holders" and some are actual fans and followers. 542507[/snapback] And I guess some people just can't accept that they don't always make as much sense to others as they do to themselves. But I guess that follows, since you're already assuming things that are neither true nor ever said. Regardless, thanks for the info.
BillsBabe Posted December 28, 2005 Author Posted December 28, 2005 And I guess some people just can't accept that they don't always make as much sense to others as they do to themselves. But I guess that follows, since you're already assuming things that are neither true nor ever said. Regardless, thanks for the info. 542570[/snapback] So, let me make sure I understand whatyou're saying -- you've never heard of Dwight Adams? AND you've been a season ticket holder for 25 years??
bobblehead Posted December 28, 2005 Posted December 28, 2005 So, let me make sure I understand whatyou're saying -- you've never heard of Dwight Adams? 544107[/snapback] He never said that.
BillsBabe Posted December 28, 2005 Author Posted December 28, 2005 He never said that. 544140[/snapback] His reply to my original post indicated he did not know what I was referring to. That strongly implies he doesn't/didn't know Dwight Adams.
Sound_n_Fury Posted December 28, 2005 Posted December 28, 2005 His reply to my original post indicated he did not know what I was referring to. That strongly implies he doesn't/didn't know Dwight Adams. 544153[/snapback] Uh, I believe it strongly implied that he didn't know who YOU are....
Simon Posted December 28, 2005 Posted December 28, 2005 His reply to my original post indicated he did not know what I was referring to. That strongly implies he doesn't/didn't know Dwight Adams. Rubes is one of the good guys, Babe. He's observant, honest and a real Bills fan. I think he's well aware of who Dwight Adams is, but had no idea who exactly you are. Cya
Adam Posted December 28, 2005 Posted December 28, 2005 Unfortunately, you're probably correct. 542520[/snapback] Why unfortunately- I'm prepared to celebrate the announcement.....it will make me happier than New Years- it signifies that we are not going for shiny objects, and change just for the sake of change
BillsBabe Posted December 28, 2005 Author Posted December 28, 2005 Not for those of us that don't know what you're talking about... 541939[/snapback] This reply indicates he didnt know "what" (who) I was talking about. I'm sure he is a good guy -- MOST on here are! However, his reply explicitly states that he didin't know what I was talking about -- which is fine!! Now he does, and hopefully will continue his support of the Bills' program.
Rubes Posted December 28, 2005 Posted December 28, 2005 Rubes is one of the good guys, Babe. He's observant, honest and a real Bills fan.I think he's well aware of who Dwight Adams is, but had no idea who exactly you are. Cya 544163[/snapback] Bingo. And thanks, Simon! I didn't know what you were referring to...not "who" you were referring to. I just had no idea why someone would all of a sudden want to post something about bringing Dwight Adams back, out of the blue, with no explanation why.
BillsBabe Posted December 28, 2005 Author Posted December 28, 2005 Why unfortunately- I'm prepared to celebrate the announcement.....it will make me happier than New Years- it signifies that we are not going for shiny objects, and change just for the sake of change 544165[/snapback] Change is inherently necessary when progress is the desired result. If you keep doing things the same way you've always done 'em, you'll getthe same results you've always gotten! Of course, some are resistant not only to change, but progress as well. It is obvious into which category you fit. And, by the way, what "announcment" are you prepared to "celebrate?" I'm not aware of any "announcements" concerning ANY changes at OBD -- again, unfortunately.
JoeF Posted December 28, 2005 Posted December 28, 2005 Change is inherently necessary when progress is the desired result. If you keep doing things the same way you've always done 'em, you'll getthe same results you've always gotten! Of course, some are resistant not only to change, but progress as well. It is obvious into which category you fit. And, by the way, what "announcment" are you prepared to "celebrate?" I'm not aware of any "announcements" concerning ANY changes at OBD -- again, unfortunately. 544174[/snapback] While no announcements are pending...are you aware of any "recent" calls being made from a certain 87 year old owner to a former VP of Player Personnel seeking advice? Of course only share what you are at liberty to .......
BillsBabe Posted December 28, 2005 Author Posted December 28, 2005 Bingo. And thanks, Simon! I didn't know what you were referring to...not "who" you were referring to. I just had no idea why someone would all of a sudden want to post something about bringing Dwight Adams back, out of the blue, with no explanation why. 544171[/snapback] Point taken, and accepted!
BillsBabe Posted December 28, 2005 Author Posted December 28, 2005 While no announcements are pending...are you aware of any "recent" calls being made from a certain 87 year old owner to a former VP of Player Personnel seeking advice? Of course only share what you are at liberty to ....... 544175[/snapback] You may rest assured that Dwight Adams has not heard from Ralph Wilson since BEFORE he was unceremoniuosly not "retained."
Adam Posted December 28, 2005 Posted December 28, 2005 Change is inherently necessary when progress is the desired result. If you keep doing things the same way you've always done 'em, you'll getthe same results you've always gotten! Of course, some are resistant not only to change, but progress as well. It is obvious into which category you fit. And, by the way, what "announcment" are you prepared to "celebrate?" I'm not aware of any "announcements" concerning ANY changes at OBD -- again, unfortunately. 544174[/snapback] I disagee- sometimes sticking to your guns brings better results. No, I am not resistant to change, not at all- I did want Bledsoe out- which was a positive move, although it may not seem so at the present time. I think some changes in player personnel will drastically change the results over the next 2 seasons. As we get better at the line of scrimmage, and as JP Losman improves, we will become a serious contender. Otherawise, you rip apart this team, and start completely over, and wait another 5 years to see if anything happens.
BillsBabe Posted December 28, 2005 Author Posted December 28, 2005 I disagee- sometimes sticking to your guns brings better results. No, I am not resistant to change, not at all- I did want Bledsoe out- which was a positive move, although it may not seem so at the present time. I think some changes in player personnel will drastically change the results over the next 2 seasons. As we get better at the line of scrimmage, and as JP Losman improves, we will become a serious contender. Otherawise, you rip apart this team, and start completely over, and wait another 5 years to see if anything happens. 544188[/snapback] Adding a seasoned, successful draft consultant would not be "ripping the team apart." According to some, the "problems" are not on the field.
Recommended Posts