Kelly the Dog Posted March 12, 2006 Posted March 12, 2006 1. Cut Moulds. 2. Sign Antonio Bryant. 3. Cut Shelton. 4. Draft Vernon Davis 5. Sign Runyon 6. Sign a second tier guard like Neal or use #2 for Spencer or one of the solid rookie guards available in the second round. 7. Move Gandy to back-up guard and tackle. Our offense would be a one back set with two tight ends and two WRs. Bryant and Evans would spread the field. Everett and Davis would totally mess with the middle of the field. Willis would be the one-back but mostly run out of a two tight end set. Royal would rotate with Everett, either of them would be either in tight or split out at the line, causing trouble for the defense. We would instantly be fast, versatile and explosive. Easily affordable.
apuszczalowski Posted March 12, 2006 Posted March 12, 2006 I doubt you'll see Davis signed, now that they signed Royal
Kelly the Dog Posted March 12, 2006 Author Posted March 12, 2006 I doubt you'll see Davis signed, now that they signed Royal 625220[/snapback] Royal is a blocker. All teams need a blocker as a TE. Everett and Euhus are both receiving TEs, and Euhus has shown nothing. In no way IMO does the signing of Royal inhibit or prohibit the drafting of Davis. Neufeld is useless.
Oneonta Buffalo Fan Posted March 12, 2006 Posted March 12, 2006 1. Cut Moulds.2. Sign Antonio Bryant. 3. Cut Shelton. 4. Draft Vernon Davis 5. Sign Runyon 6. Sign a second tier guard like Neal or use #2 for Spencer or one of the solid rookie guards available in the second round. 7. Move Gandy to back-up guard and tackle. Our offense would be a one back set with two tight ends and two WRs. Bryant and Evans would spread the field. Everett and Davis would totally mess with the middle of the field. Willis would be the one-back but mostly run out of a two tight end set. Royal would rotate with Everett, either of them would be either in tight or split out at the line, casuing trouble for the defense. We would instantly be fast, versatile and explosive. Easily affordable. 625218[/snapback] And yet another person is somehow reading my thoughts. Only thing to argue now is whether to pick up Andre' Davis or Antonio Bryant. We have had a lot of success with people named Andre.
Brian Cohen Posted March 12, 2006 Posted March 12, 2006 Royal is a blocker. All teams need a blocker as a TE. Everett and Euhus are both receiving TEs, and Euhus has shown nothing. In no way IMO does the signing of Royal inhibit or prohibit the drafting of Davis. Neufeld is useless. 625222[/snapback] a foine plan kelly......but...gandy will start at lg, or lt....he will not be a back up this yr. i agree wholeheartedly that willis will play from the one back this yr, with 2 te's.. royal and a pass catcher, the only question is who.
Deep2Moulds46 Posted March 12, 2006 Posted March 12, 2006 a foine plan kelly......but...gandy will start at lg, or lt....he will not be a back up this yr. i agree wholeheartedly that willis will play from the one back this yr, with 2 te's.. royal and a pass catcher, the only question is who. 625228[/snapback] How can you say Mike Gandy will not be a backup. If he is starting anywhere on this line....then it is still a liability.
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted March 12, 2006 Posted March 12, 2006 1. Cut Moulds.2. Sign Antonio Bryant. 3. Cut Shelton. 4. Draft Vernon Davis 5. Sign Runyon 6. Sign a second tier guard like Neal or use #2 for Spencer or one of the solid rookie guards available in the second round. 7. Move Gandy to back-up guard and tackle. Our offense would be a one back set with two tight ends and two WRs. Bryant and Evans would spread the field. Everett and Davis would totally mess with the middle of the field. Willis would be the one-back but mostly run out of a two tight end set. Royal would rotate with Everett, either of them would be either in tight or split out at the line, casuing trouble for the defense. We would instantly be fast, versatile and explosive. Easily affordable. 625218[/snapback] 1. Ok No problem there. I like Moulds but not at his current contract. 2. I like Bryant would rather have a posession type wr though like David Givens, because we already have our burner in evans, and potentialy andre davis if he signs with us 3. Not a Problem. Daimon Shelton is a slow pos. The Fullback position is also becoming non exsistent, although I'd like to draft a receiving threat at this position who can also block. 4. I'd rather we go defense with our first pick, but Vernon Davis is a beast. 5. Is runyan a free agent? 6. Would Love Neal. Charles Spencer has Jamie Nails written all over him I'd rather draft Lutui. Or Rob Sims from The Ohio State University in a later round. 7. Truthfully I'd give Gandy every chance to compete for the rg spot with an ever declining Chris Villarrial. Additions 8. Center imo is the most important position on an offensive line. Now that Bentley is out of the question, I'd like to get Mawae and draft a center to groom behind him Someone like Patrick Ross from BC. I like your idea in theory but it just seems too finesse for a cold weather team. Good Strategy if you're an indoor dome or warm weather team. I'd rather have an offense based around the run game with big play potential then a big play team who has the threat of a run game.
Brian Cohen Posted March 12, 2006 Posted March 12, 2006 How can you say Mike Gandy will not be a backup. If he is starting anywhere on this line....then it is still a liability. 625230[/snapback] mike gandy isnt a !@#$ing liability if you watched the fawking games, friend. he's an unspectacular guy, but not bad. for whats avl at the price he's a foine lg.
Pyrite Gal Posted March 12, 2006 Posted March 12, 2006 Royal is a blocker. All teams need a blocker as a TE. Everett and Euhus are both receiving TEs, and Euhus has shown nothing. In no way IMO does the signing of Royal inhibit or prohibit the drafting of Davis. Neufeld is useless. 625222[/snapback] Does the signing of Royal prohibit the drafting of Davis. No, not at all, The Bills can certainly do anything they want even if it makes little sense. Goes it inhibit the drafting of Davis. Yep. Big time. Davis was already going to be a stretch for any team as the current franchise # fir a TE is 3.3 million and even the transition # is $2.7 million. He turned in such a mutant performance at the combine perhaps a team can justify taking him in a place where his slotted contract will already put him among the highest paid TEs in the league, but already picking him is a load. Add to that the Bills already have 3 TEs under contract (substantial contracts as they gave one to FA Royal and both Everett and Euhus are working off 3rd round and 4 th round contracts and the idea of picking Davis with our # 8 becomes an even bigger stretch. Add to this that NFL Network had pundits on who also are ga-ga over Davis's combine work and are even talking about him as a potential top 5 pick which means we may well have to trade up to fulfill your goals. Add to this that this draft led by Davis is being talked about as one of the best TE classes in years. Even if we used a later or second day pick on a TE we probably would get a quality player and still would need to cut the useless player you mention who has made the Bills the last couple of years. The Royal signing in no way makes picking Davis impossible, but it and for several other reasons simply makes it so unlikely as you are way far away from meeting remotely any burden of a case that this move makes sense. In order for it to even make any sense I think the case would have to be made: 1. By drafting Davis we clearly forgo any chance at Ngata and a credible explanation would need to be made of how with Triplett and the current crew or a later pick we generate the pass rush necessary to make the Cover 2 work. 2. I assume we keep 4 TEs but two sit. The two who sit suck up significant cap space when as useless as Neufeld is we are probably limited to Neufeld level $ for a 4 TE. How does drafting Davis #8 make any cap sense for us. 3. We may well have to trade up to get Davis and if he is central to our desires we better trade up merely on the threat somone else will take him with an existing pick or somebody else will trade up and get him. How much and who do you think is worth giving up to do this?
ans4e64 Posted March 12, 2006 Posted March 12, 2006 6. Would Love Neal. Charles Spencer has Jamie Nails written all over him I'd rather draft Lutui. Or Rob Sims from The Ohio State University in a later round. 625231[/snapback] that makes no sense at all, spencer is an absolute animal, and he actually has muscle. Lutui is fat as hell and can barely move.
ans4e64 Posted March 12, 2006 Posted March 12, 2006 1. Cut Moulds.2. Sign Antonio Bryant. 3. Cut Shelton. 4. Draft Vernon Davis 5. Sign Runyon 6. Sign a second tier guard like Neal or use #2 for Spencer or one of the solid rookie guards available in the second round. 7. Move Gandy to back-up guard and tackle. Our offense would be a one back set with two tight ends and two WRs. Bryant and Evans would spread the field. Everett and Davis would totally mess with the middle of the field. Willis would be the one-back but mostly run out of a two tight end set. Royal would rotate with Everett, either of them would be either in tight or split out at the line, causing trouble for the defense. We would instantly be fast, versatile and explosive. Easily affordable. 625218[/snapback] one problem.... our defense is terrible. I know you're only talking about offense in this thread but the fact that we will use all our free agent money on offense and draft more offense with the first pick is unrealistic.
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted March 12, 2006 Posted March 12, 2006 that makes no sense at all, spencer is an absolute animal, and he actually has muscle. Lutui is fat as hell and can barely move. 625259[/snapback] Not true. Spencer is damn near 350lbs. Lutui measured in at about 315 which is why his stock shot up. He does have weight concerns this is true, but lutui is a big reason for the sucess of lendale white and reggie bush. I am a little quick to rush to judgement as I dont see much Pitt games, so this could be why I prefer lutui over Spencer. Either way the interior of the oline needs to be upgraded
Kelly the Dog Posted March 12, 2006 Author Posted March 12, 2006 Does the signing of Royal prohibit the drafting of Davis. No, not at all, The Bills can certainly do anything they want even if it makes little sense. Goes it inhibit the drafting of Davis. Yep. Big time. Davis was already going to be a stretch for any team as the current franchise # fir a TE is 3.3 million and even the transition # is $2.7 million. He turned in such a mutant performance at the combine perhaps a team can justify taking him in a place where his slotted contract will already put him among the highest paid TEs in the league, but already picking him is a load. Add to that the Bills already have 3 TEs under contract (substantial contracts as they gave one to FA Royal and both Everett and Euhus are working off 3rd round and 4 th round contracts and the idea of picking Davis with our # 8 becomes an even bigger stretch. Add to this that NFL Network had pundits on who also are ga-ga over Davis's combine work and are even talking about him as a potential top 5 pick which means we may well have to trade up to fulfill your goals. Add to this that this draft led by Davis is being talked about as one of the best TE classes in years. Even if we used a later or second day pick on a TE we probably would get a quality player and still would need to cut the useless player you mention who has made the Bills the last couple of years. The Royal signing in no way makes picking Davis impossible, but it and for several other reasons simply makes it so unlikely as you are way far away from meeting remotely any burden of a case that this move makes sense. In order for it to even make any sense I think the case would have to be made: 1. By drafting Davis we clearly forgo any chance at Ngata and a credible explanation would need to be made of how with Triplett and the current crew or a later pick we generate the pass rush necessary to make the Cover 2 work. 2. I assume we keep 4 TEs but two sit. The two who sit suck up significant cap space when as useless as Neufeld is we are probably limited to Neufeld level $ for a 4 TE. How does drafting Davis #8 make any cap sense for us. 3. We may well have to trade up to get Davis and if he is central to our desires we better trade up merely on the threat somone else will take him with an existing pick or somebody else will trade up and get him. How much and who do you think is worth giving up to do this? 625246[/snapback] You're nuts. First, I doubt we will have to trade up for Davis, and I wouldnt advocate that. Second, 3rd and 4th round contracts are pennies compared to regular contracts for any veteran. Counting what they gave Royal, which isnt much, we are still paying our TEs in the lower third of the league. A TE like Davis immediately lessens the need for Moulds and opens up the field for every single player on our offense, something which none of our TEs do right now. Counting on Everett is a pipe dream regardless of what he turns out to be. And as far as Ngata goes, 9 out of 10 draftniks and scouts seem to be saying that Davis is a better TE than Ngata is a DT and a surer bet.
ans4e64 Posted March 12, 2006 Posted March 12, 2006 Not true. Spencer is damn near 350lbs. Lutui measured in at about 315 which is why his stock shot up. He does have weight concerns this is true, but lutui is a big reason for the sucess of lendale white and reggie bush. 625262[/snapback] i know spencer is huge but what im saying is that he can actually carry this weight and play football at the same time. i dont care what lutui weighs, he looks incredibly fat and his frame does not allow him to carry that weight well. I know he's good and he was responsible for the success of those two backs, but if you had to compare either spencer or lutui to nails, its definitely not spencer, he actually has a work ethic.
Kelly the Dog Posted March 12, 2006 Author Posted March 12, 2006 one problem.... our defense is terrible. I know you're only talking about offense in this thread but the fact that we will use all our free agent money on offense and draft more offense with the first pick is unrealistic. 625261[/snapback] Untrue. We signed Vincent and Villarial together for the cap hit we would save for cutting Moulds. We could easily have money to sign more players for the defense. Bryant will be a mid range signing but not break the bank. Runyon will be relatively cheap. We could easily sign Bryant, Runyon a decent safety and another DT if we cut Moulds.
ans4e64 Posted March 12, 2006 Posted March 12, 2006 Untrue. We signed Vincent and Villarial together for the cap hit we would save for cutting Moulds. We could easily have money to sign more players for the defense. Bryant will be a mid range signing but not break the bank. Runyon will be relatively cheap. We could easily sign Bryant, Runyon a decent safety and another DT if we cut Moulds. 625267[/snapback] sure, you can sign 100 players and still fit them under the cap for that one year. The reason why teams get into cap trouble is because they do this and it benefits them for one year, they take the majority of the cap hits years after. I dont think signing runyon, bryant, a guard, a safety, another DT, along with royal and tripplet, as well as having draft picks in the top 10 in each round is a good idea for the future of our cap.
Kelly the Dog Posted March 12, 2006 Author Posted March 12, 2006 sure, you can sign 100 players and still fit them under the cap for that one year. The reason why teams get into cap trouble is because they do this and it benefits them for one year, they take the majority of the cap hits years after. I dont think signing runyon, bryant, a guard, a safety, another DT, along with royal and tripplet, as well as having draft picks in the top 10 in each round is a good idea for the future of our cap. 625269[/snapback] We have much more than ten million in dead money that comes off the books next year from Moulds if he is cut, Mike Williams, Adams, Milloy, etc. Those players we'd sign this year wouldnt come close to that. We won't have cap problems at all.
Stussy109 Posted March 12, 2006 Posted March 12, 2006 How can you say Mike Gandy will not be a backup. If he is starting anywhere on this line....then it is still a liability. 625230[/snapback] Point out a game where he had a bad game, and I'll believe you. I was at every home game and used to watch the line closely. (As close as possible live) I never remember him standing out liek a sore thumb. i remember Teague being beat big, and Mike Williams would be ebat outside occasionally.
Mickey Posted March 12, 2006 Posted March 12, 2006 What am I missing as far as the line is concerned? Runyan has 10 years on him and plays RT, not LT. This unit was arguably the worst in the entire NFL last year. I don't see it taking much of a step forward by adding Runyan and a second or third round rookie guard. We had Lee Evans, Eric Moulds and Willis last year. That is plenty of talent at the skill positions but it did not matter because of the offensive line. What I picture here is watching Losman/Holcomb getting nailed while all these wonderful TE's run around wide open long after the play is over. We have fallen for the giltz and glam of skill players before. I want some hogs. Big, fat, ugly, smelly, dirty, blocking mo-fo hogs.
Lurker Posted March 12, 2006 Posted March 12, 2006 You're nuts. First, I doubt we will have to trade up for Davis, and I wouldnt advocate that. Second, 3rd and 4th round contracts are pennies compared to regular contracts for any veteran. Counting what they gave Royal, which isnt much, we are still paying our TEs in the lower third of the league. A TE like Davis immediately lessens the need for Moulds and opens up the field for every single player on our offense, something which none of our TEs do right now. Counting on Everett is a pipe dream regardless of what he turns out to be. And as far as Ngata goes, 9 out of 10 draftniks and scouts seem to be saying that Davis is a better TE than Ngata is a DT and a surer bet. 625265[/snapback] Correct you are. Euhas' cap hit was $492,167 last year, only marginally above the new NFL minimum. Everett's hit was $485,000. Clumpy's cap page
.thumb.jpg.529869a0a9afd197241cad0932282c97.jpg)
Recommended Posts