Oneonta Buffalo Fan Posted March 10, 2006 Posted March 10, 2006 I'm sorry to say it, but he'll be gone. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/stor...john&id=2362340 10. Not a great catch: The weirdest position is wide receiver. It's weak in the draft. It's weak in free agency. Antwaan Randle El is probably the top name among the unrestricted receivers, and he could get one of the best contracts. But he's considered a very good No. 2. The Bills have to decide Friday whether to cut Eric Moulds. If he's cut, he will be an interesting name to follow. The Seahawks are trying to re-sign Joe Jurevicius before free agency starts. David Givens, Antonio Bryant, Josh Reed, Koren Robinson and Dez White head the next wave of candidates.
erynthered Posted March 10, 2006 Posted March 10, 2006 Damn, where's Soprano when you need him for these tough questions.
R. Rich Posted March 10, 2006 Posted March 10, 2006 Who said those were the only two options? 623781[/snapback] they
Oneonta Buffalo Fan Posted March 10, 2006 Author Posted March 10, 2006 Who said those were the only two options? 623781[/snapback] Link above.
stuckincincy Posted March 10, 2006 Posted March 10, 2006 Damn, where's Soprano when you need him for these tough questions. 623779[/snapback] Rubbing his crystal balls?
scribo Posted March 10, 2006 Posted March 10, 2006 Link above. 623785[/snapback] I swear that link wasn't there when I posted.
Thailog80 Posted March 10, 2006 Posted March 10, 2006 Damn, where's Soprano when you need him for these tough questions. 623779[/snapback] He's got his head planted firmly in his deep source.
turftoe Posted March 10, 2006 Posted March 10, 2006 The Bills can take their time with Moulds. If they need the cap space, they can then cut him loose.
The Dean Posted March 10, 2006 Posted March 10, 2006 I'm sorry to say it, but he'll be gone. Bring in Givens or Randel El!!! http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/stor...john&id=2362340 10. Not a great catch: The weirdest position is wide receiver. It's weak in the draft. It's weak in free agency. Antwaan Randle El is probably the top name among the unrestricted receivers, and he could get one of the best contracts. But he's considered a very good No. 2. The Bills have to decide Friday whether to cut Eric Moulds. If he's cut, he will be an interesting name to follow. The Seahawks are trying to re-sign Joe Jurevicius before free agency starts. David Givens, Antonio Bryant, Josh Reed, Koren Robinson and Dez White head the next wave of candidates. 623777[/snapback] I think that's incorrect. They are under the cap, so they don't HAVE to cut him right away. They can take their good sweet time...right?
Dan Gross Posted March 10, 2006 Posted March 10, 2006 Why do they have to decide Moulds' fate by tonight? They are well under the cap...and it's not like he's due a roster bonus tomorrow...is he? And if he had to be cut by 12:01 am Friday, then I guess he's staying because it has already passed...
Stl Bills Posted March 10, 2006 Posted March 10, 2006 Why do they have to decide Moulds' fate by tonight? They are well under the cap...and it's not like he's due a roster bonus tomorrow...is he? And if he had to be cut by 12:01 am Friday, then I guess he's staying because it has already passed... 623838[/snapback] If he was due a roster bonus doesn't that come into play after June 1st. I thought I remembered hearing if we were going to cut him, we had till June 1st cuts to really decide. I could be wrong though, anybody know? Thats just long enough for this thing to get real ugly.
Pyrate Posted March 10, 2006 Posted March 10, 2006 PS the deadline to get under the cap is 6pm EST on Friday (today) Moulds won't be cut anyway
The Senator Posted March 10, 2006 Posted March 10, 2006 Well, it's Friday and EM hasn't been cut, so I guess the Bills now have no option but to keep him, right? Of course not! The statement in the ESPN article was pretty stupid - the Bills are under no time constraint to cut Moulds, if that's what they choose to do. But cutting EM is about the most stupid move I can think of - you get nothing for him, he could end up in the AFC East, and the marginal cap savings are $2-3 million - at best (woohoo), after you consider that you still need to sign his replacement (who, BTW, may not be as good as EM). I don't know why no one is listening to what Marv has been saying - Marv has said he's wants to keep Moulds here, so I don't think he's going anywhere. I would prefer that EM remain in Buffalo but if he doesn't, Marv's not stupid enough to cut him outright - more likely he'll work out a trade with Denver or Phildelphia before the draft for players and/or picks. Just my humble opinion.
The Dean Posted March 10, 2006 Posted March 10, 2006 Well, it's Friday and EM hasn't been cut, so I guess the Bills now have no option but to keep him, right? Of course not! The statement in the ESPN article was pretty stupid - the Bills are under no time constraint to cut Moulds, if that's what they choose to do. But cutting EM is about the most stupid move I can think of - you get nothing for him, he could end up in the AFC East, and the marginal cap savings are $2-3 million - at best (woohoo), after you consider that you still need to sign his replacement (who, BTW, may not be as good as EM). I don't know why no one is listening to what Marv has been saying - Marv has said he's wants to keep Moulds here, so I don't think he's going anywhere. I would prefer that EM remain in Buffalo but if he doesn't, Marv's not stupid enough to cut him outright - more likely he'll work out a trade with Denver or Phildelphia before the draft for players and/or picks. Just my humble opinion. 623927[/snapback] Stop being reasonable. There's NO PLACE for that on TSW!
ganesh Posted March 10, 2006 Posted March 10, 2006 Why do they have to decide Moulds' fate by tonight? They are well under the cap...and it's not like he's due a roster bonus tomorrow...is he? And if he had to be cut by 12:01 am Friday, then I guess he's staying because it has already passed... 623838[/snapback] As a sort of respect to a guy who has served them for 10 years and who deserves to get a shot early on in the FA, if he is not going to be in their plans. What purpose will it achieve if they are going to cut him June knowing in March that he was not in their plans...They did it to Drew Bledsoe, and also wish they had done it to Travis Henry....I definitely wish they do it to Moulds...
The Dean Posted March 10, 2006 Posted March 10, 2006 As a sort of respect to a guy who has served them for 10 years and whodeserves to get a shot early on in the FA, if he is not going to be in their plans. What purpose will it achieve if they are going to cut him June knowing in March that he was not in their plans...They did it to Drew Bledsoe, and also wish they had done it to Travis Henry....I definitely wish they do it to Moulds... 623948[/snapback] I don't think they should sit on EM just because they can. But as long as they are negotiating with him and/or trying to trade him, there's no need to release him. Once they're convinced they will not/can not keep OR trade him, they should let him go ASAP.
cåblelady Posted March 10, 2006 Posted March 10, 2006 I don't think they should sit on EM just because they can. 623959[/snapback] I hope they don't squash him.
Recommended Posts