Lurker Posted March 15, 2006 Posted March 15, 2006 We need offensive lineman in FA. That's where our money would be better spent. 631029[/snapback] Agreed, we need O-linemen. But the investment in Triplett will be wasted, IMO, unless we get an anchor DT to play along side him. I'd prefer a guy like Pinkett who's played well the last two years after a slow start to a rookie who may have the same development path.
BUFFALOTONE Posted March 15, 2006 Posted March 15, 2006 The one thing we can't do is hold a gun to somebody's head and make them sign here. I'd like to think Marv and co. are going to do everything within reason to sign good players for this team. But if GB turns out to have offered Pickett a desperation contract (like the one the Vikes plopped down for Hutch) there's not a whole lot you can do. When you throw down that kind of cash you inevitably hurt yourself somewhere else. I'd rather see justifiable bargain moves, getting a lot of guys who will fit what they're trying to do here. I really wouldn't mind, given the way things look right now, trading down, taking Bunckley and netting another 1st day pick. 631004[/snapback] Amen to that. Bunkley will be the better prospect and serve our new defense perfectly. Ngata is a 3-4 tackle, which we used to run. We need speed and power and Bunkley is a specimen. He will be an instant impact player. And we may even be able to trade up and get another 2nd round pick.
ans4e64 Posted March 15, 2006 Posted March 15, 2006 Marv Levy on the phone: "Hello Sam, we were only kidding." 630987[/snapback] i wonder if we can pretend that it never happened, like that one seinfeld episode where george quit and realized it was a bad move so he showed up and pretended like it never happened. I'd be willing to put together is contract with the shredded paper and super glue.
Gambler Posted March 15, 2006 Posted March 15, 2006 I can just see Ralph sitting next to Marv with the "Wizard" tip calculator that he borrowed from Mortie Sienfeld when trying to make offers to FAs out there. 630999[/snapback] You got that right. FA's are looking for the money. The Bills needed to blow his socks off with an offer so that he couldn't leave town unsigned. There are no realistic FA's out there who could improve the Bills at DT at this point. Ugh! Green Bay apparently came up with the dough and the Bills probably thought they could pick him up with some hot wings and soda. I am not writing off the entire off season until the new season starts, but it ain't looking promising. The final kick in the balls will be when they announce Moulds is staying with a $10.85 million dollar cap hit for 2006.
rwjr Posted March 15, 2006 Posted March 15, 2006 The final kick in the balls will be when they announce Moulds is staying with a $10.85 million dollar cap hit for 2006. That's Okay just make Moulds play WR and DT like in the olden days when players were tough and played both ways
apuszczalowski Posted March 15, 2006 Posted March 15, 2006 FA's are looking for the money. The Bills needed to blow his socks off with an offer so that he couldn't leave town unsigned. There are no realistic FA's out there who could improve the Bills at DT at this point. Ugh! 631066[/snapback] The problem is the Bills have to many holes to fill to just throw money at name FA's I like the way everybody is now wishing Sam Adams didn't get cut, when he was still with this team, everyone wanted him cut cause he was old and not a good player.
apuszczalowski Posted March 15, 2006 Posted March 15, 2006 The final kick in the balls will be when they announce Moulds is staying with a $10.85 million dollar cap hit for 2006.That's Okay just make Moulds play WR and DT like in the olden days when players were tough and played both ways 631089[/snapback] Why not keep Moulds at $10.85 mil Who else are we going to use the money on? According to the experts on this board, there are no more good players in FA anymore.
The Senator Posted March 15, 2006 Posted March 15, 2006 GUYS I don't think I believe this report. The reporter breaking this story is none other than the pencil necked geek, John Clayton. He was wrong about MOULDS. Maybe he has it in for the Bills or something. YOU GOTTA BILLEVE 631023[/snapback] It is interesting that there's nothing about the deal on foxsports.com, nfl.com, kffl.com, or packers.com. Anyone find anything anywhere, besides ESPN?
apuszczalowski Posted March 15, 2006 Posted March 15, 2006 Yeah, its not even announced on the packers sight, or TSN in Canada You'd think atleast the Packers website would have something about him signing if it where true
Lv-Bills Posted March 15, 2006 Posted March 15, 2006 Having Romeo there helps...but so does being 30 million dollars under the salary cap. Pretty easy to look smart when you can throw 4 million dollar a year contracts at players. 631015[/snapback] Yeah, and being 17 million under the cap when FA started isn't exactly chump change. Having 14 million left at this point, when you finish 5-11 the year before is absolutely disgusting. It's not like we don't or didn't have money to spend. Everyone is all of a sudden acting like we are cash strapped.
apuszczalowski Posted March 15, 2006 Posted March 15, 2006 30-40 Million compared to 15-17 million? thats a huge difference. We haven't even finished the first week of FA and already they should have spent all their money? More players will get cut in the following months and sometimes those are the players you wait for. But I guess winners are built on the first week of FA and Overpaying for players won't screw you over in the future.
The Senator Posted March 15, 2006 Posted March 15, 2006 Yeah, its not even announced on the packers sight, or TSN in Canada You'd think atleast the Packers website would have something about him signing if it where true 631151[/snapback] I know - and they did update their site this afternoon with the signings of Kevin Barry and Kenny Peterson. Now 'I Forgot...' has me wondering.
Lurker Posted March 15, 2006 Posted March 15, 2006 Yeah, and being 17 million under the cap when FA started isn't exactly chump change. Having 14 million left at this point, when you finish 5-11 the year before is absolutely disgusting. It's not like we don't or didn't have money to spend. Everyone is all of a sudden acting like we are cash strapped. 631155[/snapback] The $14-$15 million was before the 3 FAs signed this week. They probably have $10 million left to play with.
Lv-Bills Posted March 15, 2006 Posted March 15, 2006 30-40 Million compared to 15-17 million? thats a huge difference. We haven't even finished the first week of FA and already they should have spent all their money? More players will get cut in the following months and sometimes those are the players you wait for. But I guess winners are built on the first week of FA and Overpaying for players won't screw you over in the future. 631166[/snapback] How about 31.5 for Cleveland as opposed to 17 for the Bills, and about what...4 million more if we would just cut Moulds already? Then you are at 31.5 to 21. Why are Vincent, Posey and Anderson still on this team? How much more room would that have given us? Think we could have done some damage with those numbers? I do. I think we could have actually grabbed some YOUNG line talent and still have gotten Royal, Davis and Triplett. Most everyone would be content with that going into the draft. We also haven't even finished the first week of Free Agency and most of the players this side of 30 years old and / or worth anything are gone.
seq004 Posted March 15, 2006 Posted March 15, 2006 And whatever you do, do NOT waste them on OL. We need more safeties, WRs and TEs. 630874[/snapback]
BB2004 Posted March 15, 2006 Posted March 15, 2006 Is Grady Jackson still available? 630883[/snapback] That would be the next guy I would bring in.
Lurker Posted March 17, 2006 Posted March 17, 2006 The funny thing is, Nagata's signing bonus and total salary as the #8 pick might not be that different from what Pickett's deal is gonna be. 630875[/snapback] Terms of the deal weren't immediately available, but it was believed Pickett received a signing bonus in the neighborhood of $3.5 million. By signing Pickett, the Packers have a younger, healthier alternative to Grady Jackson, who is an unrestricted free agent. A $3.5 million SB doesn't seem like that heavy a lift.
Recommended Posts